Re: [Discuss] Compatibility on CLI command output

2022-04-26 Thread Stephen O'Donnell
Thanks for all the replies. To summarise this thread, we have 5 people who agree with the proposals, and also a few other points: 1. Attila - We should create tests to ensure the compatibility is not broken accidently. 2. Pifta - We should emphasize JSON can allow fields to change order, and any

Re: [Discuss] Compatibility on CLI command output

2022-04-23 Thread Ayush Saxena
Thanx Stephen for initiating this. +1 to have specific documented compat guidelines, all 4 points makes sense to me.. -Ayush > On 23-Apr-2022, at 1:41 AM, Uma Maheswara Rao Gangumalla > wrote: > > Hi Stephen, > > Thanks for starting this thread. > > I am +1. I agree that adding new lines

Re: [Discuss] Compatibility on CLI command output

2022-04-22 Thread Uma Maheswara Rao Gangumalla
Hi Stephen, Thanks for starting this thread. I am +1. I agree that adding new lines should be allowed. It's hard to provide a flag for every addition as that can bring many flags and make things ungly eventually. Nilotpal, if you have some tests around validating the command line outputs, would

Re: [Discuss] Compatibility on CLI command output

2022-04-22 Thread Stephen O'Donnell
Thanks for the comments Nilotpal, I have created a Jira to track commands with missing JSON output, and added one Jira to it already: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-6637 If you, or anyone, comes across a command that is missing the JSON option, please add a Jira to that epic and we e

Re: [Discuss] Compatibility on CLI command output

2022-04-22 Thread Nilotpal Nandi
Hi Stephen , I am +1 on having both human readable output and json output (with an extra argument) for CLI commands. Please make sure, for ALL the CLI commands/sub-commands , json outputs are present before actually making changes in human readable CLI outputs. Otherwise, tests would still rely

Re: [Discuss] Compatibility on CLI command output

2022-04-21 Thread Stephen O'Donnell
Thanks for the comments Pifta. I guess my suggestion "for JSON the existing field names and structures should remain the same", was a little vague. I agree that with JSON, having: { f1: v1 f2: v2 } Is semantically the same whether f1 or f2 comes first. The point I was trying to make is that

Re: [Discuss] Compatibility on CLI command output

2022-04-21 Thread István Fajth
Hi Stephen, thank you for bringing this up, I strongly agree with you, we should get a document about compatibility for sure. On the CLI part, I also agree with all the 4 points in general, though let me add a few things: For #1. JSON as it is defined at: https://www.json.org/json-en.html does not

Re: [Discuss] Compatibility on CLI command output

2022-04-20 Thread Attila Doroszlai
> 1. We should ensure that information is never removed from command output, > unless it is deprecated and removed gracefully after some number of > releases. For JSON the existing field names and location in the JSON > structure should remain the same. > > 2. Information can be added to command ou

[Discuss] Compatibility on CLI command output

2022-04-20 Thread Stephen O'Donnell
Discussing compatibility with some team members, we realised that we don't have anything written down about compatibility guarantees in general. There are many areas in compatibility, but for this discussion, I would like to focus on CLI command output. Ozone is still relatively immature, and as s