openlmi-devel May 2014

openlmi-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org

10 participants
20 discussions

RE: A provider for publishing Management Controller (Service Processor) information
by Praveen_Paladugu＠Dell.com 16 Jul '14

16 Jul '14

Firstly, Sorry about the long long delay with the response. Because of a few personal and work items, had to push this to the back burner. Have a few cycles to work on this and would like to get this going again. Based on the comments from the past threads, updated the MOF as follows and added some of my comments below, please take a look. [Description("Model an Out of Band Management Controller and capture its features and capabilities")] class LMI_BMC : CIM_ManagementController { [Description("This variable, should always capture the latest ipv4 IP/s addresses of BMC.")] string IP4Addresses[]; [Description("This variable, should always capture the latest ipv6 IP/s addresses of BMC.")] string IP6Addresses[]; [Description("The VLAN setting on the BMC NIC port.")] string VLAN; [Description("This variable will capture MAC address of the BMC.")] string PermanentMACAddresses; [Description("If BMC provides any user friendly interfaces like http, ftp etc, this variable will capture the related URL/s to interact with BMC.")] string BMC_URL[]; /* COMMENT: If the following properties are rolledup into CIM_LogicalDevice, would a user enumerating LMI_BMC not be able to see these properties? Or is it just a matter of how the Enumeration function is defined for this class? */ /* #Capture this information in IdentifyingDescriptions inherited from CIM_LogicalDevice #string Manufacturer_ID; #string Manufacturer; #string Model; */ [Description("This variable will capture the version of the firmware installed on the BMC")] string FirmwareVersion; [Description("This Array will capture the list of protocols supported by the BMC")] string SupportedProtos[]; [Description("This Array will capture the version of the supported protocol listed in the corresponding index of SupportedProtos ")] string SupportedProtoVersion[]; /*COMMENT: Should the below function assign a new virtual ip address to those already on the BMC? Or should the user be able to pass a list of IP addresses to overwrite the existing ones? Am leaning towards the latter option*/ [Description("Function to add a new IPv4 address to BMC." "If the operation of setting the IP Address succeeds, return 0" "If command fails, return 1" "If the provided input is not a valid IP address, return 2" )] uint32 set_IP4Address( [IN, Description ("Set the IP address of the BMC, to the input value")] string Input_IP, [IN, Description ("Set the netmask to this input value")] string Input_Netmask, [IN, Description ("Set the gateway this input value")] string Input_Gateway); [Description("Function to assign a new IPv6 address to BMC." "If the operation of setting the IP Address succeeds, return 0" "If IPMI command fails, return 1" "If the provided input is not a valid IP address, return 2" )] uint32 set_IP6Address( [IN, Description ("Set the IP address of the BMC, to the input value")] string Input_IP6Address, [IN, Description ("Set the netmask to this input value")] string Input_Netmask, [IN, Description ("Set the gateway on BMC to this input value")] string Input_Gateway); [Description("Function to assign a VLAN ID to BMC." "If the operation of setting the VLAN ID succeeds, return 0" "If command fails, return 1" "If the provided input is not a valid VLAN ID, return 2" )] uint32 set_VLAN( [IN, Description("Set the VLAN ID of BMC NIC to this input value")] string Input_Vlan ); [Description("Some servers have dedicated NIC attached to BMC, some share a LOM used for host n/w communications. This function will let the user determine which the case is." "dedicated: will let the user know that BMC is using a dedicated NIC" "A response like LOM1 will let the user know that BMC is sharing LOM1 of the server with the OS." )] string get_active_nic(); }; Thank you Praveen K Paladugu Dell Linux Engineering

3 7

Videos: Introducing OpenLMI
by Russell Doty 30 May '14

30 May '14

For your entertainment and amusement, Stephen Gallagher and I have done a reprise of our Red Hat Summit presentation on OpenLMI and posted it to YouTube. Four videos are available on the TechPonder channel: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=techponder Intro to OpenLMI Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNJIiWVe9r0 Intro to OpenLMI Part 2 Architecture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqWk6L3-qRs Intro to OpenLMI Part 3 Examples: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oMbasUgfgo Intro to OpenLMI Part 4 Elephants and Conclusions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaMXpIbJoek

1 0

New OpenLMI Web Site
by Russell Doty 30 May '14

30 May '14

We have created a new Web Site for the OpenLMI project at www.openlmi.org and are pushing it live. You will see the new site as soon as DNS changes propagate. The biggest change is that we are now focusing on USING OpenLMI as much as on OpenLMI developers - this is a major milestone for OpenLMI! Features of the new site: * New front page layout focusing on the three major topics: * Introducing OpenLMI * OpenLMI for System Administrators * OpenLMI for Developers * A more readable layout * Improved navigation. We now have separate navigation menus for sysadmins and developers. * Support for tablets and cell phones. Try it - the new design works much better than the old one on small screens! * New security features. Hopefully you will never see these... We welcome your feedback and suggestions on the new site as we continue to improve it and add more content.

1 0

openlmi-reviews Digest, Vol 13, Issue 6
by openlmi-reviews-request＠lists.fedorahosted.org 29 May '14

29 May '14

Send openlmi-reviews mailing list submissions to openlmi-reviews(a)lists.fedorahosted.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/openlmi-reviews or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to openlmi-reviews-request(a)lists.fedorahosted.org You can reach the person managing the list at openlmi-reviews-owner(a)lists.fedorahosted.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of openlmi-reviews digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Review Request 1740: Add indication testing framework (Alois Mahdal) 2. Re: Review Request 1740: Add indication testing framework (Alois Mahdal) 3. Review Request 1756: Add BaseTestDriver base class (Alois Mahdal) 4. Review Request 1757: Add indication testing framework (Alois Mahdal) 5. Review Request 1758: Add AccountIndicationTestDriver, application of indication testing framework. (Alois Mahdal) 6. Review Request 1759: Add event-based tests for indications (basic set) (Alois Mahdal) 7. Re: Review Request 1740: Add indication testing framework (Alois Mahdal) 8. Re: Review Request 1741: Add event-based tests for indications (basic set) (Alois Mahdal) 9. Re: Review Request 1756: Add BaseTestDriver base class (Michal Minar) 10. Re: Review Request 1757: Add indication testing framework (Michal Minar) 11. Re: Review Request 1758: Add AccountIndicationTestDriver, application of indication testing framework. (Michal Minar) 12. Re: Review Request 1754: Fix error in PackedSequence (Michal Minar) 13. Re: Review Request 1751: providers [1/1] software: proper logging setup for python 2.6 (Michal Minar) 14. Re: Review Request 1756: Add BaseTestDriver base class (Alois Mahdal) 15. Re: Review Request 1757: Add indication testing framework (Alois Mahdal) 16. Re: Review Request 1757: Add indication testing framework (Alois Mahdal) 17. Re: Review Request 1758: Add AccountIndicationTestDriver, application of indication testing framework. (Alois Mahdal) 18. Re: Review Request 1754: Fix error in PackedSequence (Alois Mahdal) 19. Review Request 1760: journald: Expose UID, GID, PID and syslog facility/severity fields (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 20. Review Request 1761: journald: Fix instance number limiter (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 21. Re: Review Request 1761: journald: Fix instance number limiter (scanbot) 22. Re: Review Request 1760: journald: Expose UID, GID, PID and syslog facility/severity fields (scanbot) 23. Re: Review Request 1760: journald: Expose UID, GID, PID and syslog facility/severity fields (scanbot) 24. Re: Review Request 1761: journald: Fix instance number limiter (scanbot) 25. Review Request 1762: journald: Enhance indication tests for UID/GID/PID matching (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 26. Re: Review Request 1761: journald: Fix instance number limiter (Jan Synacek) 27. Re: Review Request 1760: journald: Expose UID, GID, PID and syslog facility/severity fields (Michal Minar) 28. Re: Review Request 1762: journald: Enhance indication tests for UID/GID/PID matching (Michal Minar) 29. Re: Review Request 1760: journald: Expose UID, GID, PID and syslog facility/severity fields (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 30. Re: Review Request 1760: journald: Expose UID, GID, PID and syslog facility/severity fields (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 31. Re: Review Request 1760: journald: Expose UID, GID, PID and syslog facility/severity fields (scanbot) 32. Re: Review Request 1760: journald: Expose UID, GID, PID and syslog facility/severity fields (scanbot) 33. Review Request 1763: software: Docs typo (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 34. Review Request 1764: konkretcmpi-python is need to build doc (Sachidananda Urs) 35. Re: Review Request 1763: software: Docs typo (Jan Synacek) 36. Re: Review Request 1764: konkretcmpi-python is need to build doc (Radek Novacek) 37. Re: Review Request 1764: konkretcmpi-python is need to build doc (Sachidananda Urs) 38. Review Request 1765: journald: Add static indication filters (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 39. Review Request 1766: journald: Add indication and filtering docs examples (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 40. Review Request 1767: journald: Update the spec file for new static indication filters (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 41. Review Request 1767: journald: Update the spec file for new static indication filters (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 42. Re: Review Request 1765: journald: Add static indication filters (Michal Minar) 43. Re: Review Request 1766: journald: Add indication and filtering docs examples (Michal Minar) 44. Re: Review Request 1767: journald: Update the spec file for new static indication filters (Michal Minar) 45. Re: Review Request 1760: journald: Expose UID, GID, PID and syslog facility/severity fields (Michal Minar) 46. Review Request 1768: journald: Add WQL query example to the docs (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 47. Re: Review Request 1768: journald: Add WQL query example to the docs (Jan Synacek) 48. Re: Review Request 1767: journald: Update the spec file for new static indication filters (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 49. Re: Review Request 1768: journald: Add WQL query example to the docs (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 50. Re: Review Request 1766: journald: Add indication and filtering docs examples (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 51. Re: Review Request 1765: journald: Add static indication filters (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 52. Re: Review Request 1763: software: Docs typo (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 53. Re: Review Request 1760: journald: Expose UID, GID, PID and syslog facility/severity fields (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 54. Re: Review Request 1762: journald: Enhance indication tests for UID/GID/PID matching (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 55. Re: Review Request 1761: journald: Fix instance number limiter (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 56. Re: Review Request 430: [1/1] New provider: Locale (Vitezslav Crhonek) 57. Re: Review Request 430: [1/1] New provider: Locale (scanbot) 58. Re: Review Request 430: [1/1] New provider: Locale (scanbot) _______________________________________________ openlmi-reviews mailing list openlmi-reviews(a)lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/openlmi-reviews

1 0

openlmi-reviews Digest, Vol 13, Issue 5
by openlmi-reviews-request＠lists.fedorahosted.org 21 May '14

21 May '14

Send openlmi-reviews mailing list submissions to openlmi-reviews(a)lists.fedorahosted.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/openlmi-reviews or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to openlmi-reviews-request(a)lists.fedorahosted.org You can reach the person managing the list at openlmi-reviews-owner(a)lists.fedorahosted.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of openlmi-reviews digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Review Request 1686: indmanager: Add a Debugging section in the README file (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 2. Re: Review Request 1691: account: Mark TestAccountInvalidEtc tests as dangerous (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 3. Re: Review Request 1690: journald: Fix EOF reporting when not advancing next on LMI_JournalMessageLog.GetRecord() (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 4. Re: Review Request 1728: account: Don't expose the LMI_Account.UserPassword value (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 5. Re: Review Request 1647: Include profile (un)registration in the (un)register-PROVIDER make targets (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 6. Re: Review Request 1664: Adapt to recent profile registration CMake macro changes (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 7. Re: Review Request 1738: journald: Fix LMI_JournalLogRecord.PerceivedSeverity (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 8. Re: Review Request 1700: account: Make LMI_MemberOfGroup.CreateInstance() more robust (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 9. Re: Review Request 1684: Move dangling functions to common.UserOps (Jan Safranek) 10. Re: Review Request 1684: Move dangling functions to common.UserOps (Alois Mahdal) 11. Re: Review Request 1735: Add utility classes for indication testing (Alois Mahdal) 12. Re: Review Request 1736: Clean up imports in common (Alois Mahdal) 13. Re: Review Request 1699: OpenLMI SSSD provider (=?utf-8?q?Pavel_B=C5=99ezina?=) 14. Re: Review Request 1699: OpenLMI SSSD provider (=?utf-8?q?Pavel_B=C5=99ezina?=) 15. Re: Review Request 1748: providers [2/2] spec: use proper python sitelib in LMI_Software.reg file (Jan Safranek) 16. Re: Review Request 1746: providers [2/2] test base: use service instead of systemctl command (Jan Synacek) 17. Re: Review Request 1745: providers [1/2] LogicalFile: simulate subprocess check_output on python 2.6 (Jan Synacek) 18. Re: Review Request 1512: Account: Race conditions fixes (like: bz#1061150) (Robin Hack) 19. Re: Review Request 1745: providers [1/2] LogicalFile: simulate subprocess check_output on python 2.6 (Radek Novacek) 20. Re: Review Request 1748: providers [2/2] spec: use proper python sitelib in LMI_Software.reg file (Radek Novacek) 21. Re: Review Request 1746: providers [2/2] test base: use service instead of systemctl command (Radek Novacek) 22. Re: Review Request 1747: providers [1/2] Software: don't fail when logging.config doesn't have dictConfig (Michal Minar) 23. Re: Review Request 1747: providers [1/2] Software: don't fail when logging.config doesn't have dictConfig (Radek Novacek) 24. Re: Review Request 1737: PEP8, Flake8, readability improvements (Michal Minar) 25. Re: Review Request 1740: Add indication testing framework (Michal Minar) 26. Re: Review Request 1741: Add event-based tests for indications (basic set) (Michal Minar) 27. Re: Review Request 1740: Add indication testing framework (Michal Minar) 28. Re: Review Request 1740: Add indication testing framework (Michal Minar) 29. Review Request 1749: providers [1/1] Test: get rid of 'import unittest' (Radek Novacek) 30. Review Request 1750: providers [1/1] hardware: replace subprocess.check_output with Popen (Radek Novacek) 31. Re: Review Request 1749: providers [1/1] Test: get rid of 'import unittest' (Michal Minar) 32. Re: Review Request 1750: providers [1/1] hardware: replace subprocess.check_output with Popen (Michal Minar) 33. Re: Review Request 1737: PEP8, Flake8, readability improvements (Alois Mahdal) 34. Re: Review Request 1749: providers [1/1] Test: get rid of 'import unittest' (Radek Novacek) 35. Re: Review Request 1750: providers [1/1] hardware: replace subprocess.check_output with Popen (Radek Novacek) 36. Re: Review Request 1740: Add indication testing framework (Alois Mahdal) 37. Re: Review Request 430: [1/1] Locale: MOF (Vitezslav Crhonek) 38. Re: Review Request 430: [1/1] Locale: MOF (Vitezslav Crhonek) 39. Re: Review Request 1740: Add indication testing framework (Michal Minar) 40. Re: Review Request 1740: Add indication testing framework (Alois Mahdal) 41. Re: Review Request 1741: Add event-based tests for indications (basic set) (Alois Mahdal) 42. Re: Review Request 1699: OpenLMI SSSD provider (Jan Safranek) 43. Re: Review Request 1741: Add event-based tests for indications (basic set) (Michal Minar) 44. Re: Review Request 430: [1/1] Locale: MOF (Jan Safranek) 45. Review Request 1751: providers [1/1] software: proper logging setup for python 2.6 (Michal Minar) 46. Re: Review Request 430: [1/1] Locale: MOF (Vitezslav Crhonek) 47. Re: Review Request 430: [1/1] Locale: MOF (Vitezslav Crhonek) 48. Review Request 1752: providers [1/1] spec: allow to change interop namespace for tog-pegasus (Radek Novacek) 49. Re: Review Request 1752: providers [1/1] spec: allow to change interop namespace for tog-pegasus (Michal Minar) 50. Re: Review Request 1752: providers [1/1] spec: allow to change interop namespace for tog-pegasus (Radek Novacek) 51. Review Request 1753: Use only one connection for tests (Peter Hatina) 52. Re: Review Request 1753: Use only one connection for tests (Michal Minar) 53. Re: Review Request 1753: Use only one connection for tests (Peter Hatina) 54. Re: Review Request 1751: providers [1/1] software: proper logging setup for python 2.6 (Radek Novacek) 55. Review Request 1754: Fix error in PackedSequence (Alois Mahdal) 56. Re: Review Request 1741: Add event-based tests for indications (basic set) (Alois Mahdal) _______________________________________________ openlmi-reviews mailing list openlmi-reviews(a)lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/openlmi-reviews

1 0

ANNOUNCE: lmiwbem-0.2.0
by Peter Hatina 21 May '14

21 May '14

A new version of LMIWBEM is now available. What's new? * WBEMConnection: - AssociatorNames() - Associators() - CreateInstance() - DeleteInstance() - ExecQuery() - InvokeMethod() - ModifyInstance() - ReferenceNames() - References() - connectLocally() - CIM operation timeout - X509 authentication * CIMInstance(Name) classes: iteration methods * CIM* classes: cmp, copy, tomof * CIM constants - CIMError constants - ConnectionError constants - default namespace - default trust store path * CIMIndicationListener * is_subclass() * Python 2.6 and 3.x support * sphinx-based documentation * various fixes Enjoy! https://github.com/phatina/lmiwbem https://github.com/phatina/lmiwbem/releases/download/lmiwbem-0.2.0/lmiwbem-… -- Peter Hatina ENG Server Experience, System Management Red Hat Czech, Brno

1 0

Planned Review Board downtime (2014-05-20)
by Stephen Gallagher 20 May '14

20 May '14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I am planning on taking the OpenLMI Review Board instance down today at 1 PM EDT (7:00 PM CEST) for hopefully less than one hour. I will be upgrading the server from Review Board 1.7.25 to the new Review Board 2.0 release[1]. I realize this is fairly short notice, so if this will severely impact anyone's work today, please let me know and I will reschedule this upgrade. [1] http://www.reviewboard.org/news/2014/05/19/announcing-review-board-2-0/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlN7OKEACgkQeiVVYja6o6PphACeIsKk18xHuHuhb2DTCa31l8GF vGAAoJocdmBdujYn5beZBkBfkiRUYfDM =2UyC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 1

openlmi-reviews Digest, Vol 13, Issue 4
by openlmi-reviews-request＠lists.fedorahosted.org 15 May '14

15 May '14

Send openlmi-reviews mailing list submissions to openlmi-reviews(a)lists.fedorahosted.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/openlmi-reviews or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to openlmi-reviews-request(a)lists.fedorahosted.org You can reach the person managing the list at openlmi-reviews-owner(a)lists.fedorahosted.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of openlmi-reviews digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Review Request 1690: journald: Fix EOF reporting when not advancing next on LMI_JournalMessageLog.GetRecord() (scanbot) 2. Re: Review Request 1692: Hardware: spring cleanup & refactor (Peter Schiffer) 3. Re: Review Request 1692: Hardware: spring cleanup & refactor (Peter Schiffer) 4. Re: Review Request 1692: Hardware: spring cleanup & refactor (Peter Schiffer) 5. Review Request 1694: add make-rpm.sh (Jan Synacek) 6. Re: Review Request 1689: providers [1/1] account: use defaultdict instead of Counter (Radek Novacek) 7. Re: Review Request 1694: add make-rpm.sh (Radek Novacek) 8. Re: Review Request 1694: add make-rpm.sh (Jan Synacek) 9. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on providers-rawhide (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 10. Review Request 1695: providers [1/1] spec: enable libuser on RHEL-6 (Radek Novacek) 11. Re: Review Request 1695: providers [1/1] spec: enable libuser on RHEL-6 (Ales Ledvinka) 12. Re: Review Request 1695: providers [1/1] spec: enable libuser on RHEL-6 (Radek Novacek) 13. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on providers-rhel6 (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 14. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on providers-rhel7 (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 15. Re: Review Request 1528: Added tests for race conditions (Alois Mahdal) 16. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on providers-rawhide (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 17. Re: Review Request 1559: Add tests for invalid system files (Alois Mahdal) 18. Re: Review Request 430: openlmi-locale [1/1] New provider: Locale (Jan Safranek) 19. Re: Review Request 430: openlmi-locale [1/1] New provider: Locale (Jan Safranek) 20. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on networking-rhel6 (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 21. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on networking-rawhide (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 22. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on providers-rhel6 (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 23. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on storage-rhel6 (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 24. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on providers-rhel7 (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 25. buildbot success in OpenLMI on networking-rhel7 (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 26. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on providers-rhel7stable (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 27. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on storage-rhel7 (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 28. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on storage-rhel7stable (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 29. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on providers-rawhide (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 30. buildbot failure in OpenLMI on storage-rawhide (openlmiproject(a)gmail.com) 31. Review Request 1699: OpenLMI SSSD provider (=?utf-8?q?Pavel_B=C5=99ezina?=) 32. Re: Review Request 1699: OpenLMI SSSD provider (scanbot) 33. Re: Review Request 1699: OpenLMI SSSD provider (scanbot) 34. Re: Review Request 1699: OpenLMI SSSD provider (=?utf-8?q?Pavel_B=C5=99ezina?=) 35. Review Request 1700: account: Make LMI_MemberOfGroup.CreateInstance() more robust (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 36. Re: Review Request 1700: account: Make LMI_MemberOfGroup.CreateInstance() more robust (scanbot) 37. Re: Review Request 1700: account: Make LMI_MemberOfGroup.CreateInstance() more robust (scanbot) 38. Re: Review Request 1699: OpenLMI SSSD provider (Jan Safranek) 39. Review Request 1728: account: Don't expose the LMI_Account.UserPassword value (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 40. Re: Review Request 1728: account: Don't expose the LMI_Account.UserPassword value (scanbot) 41. Re: Review Request 1728: account: Don't expose the LMI_Account.UserPassword value (scanbot) 42. Review Request 1730: Clean up imports in common (Alois Mahdal) 43. Re: Review Request 1730: Clean up imports in common (Alois Mahdal) 44. Review Request 1735: Add utility classes for indication testing (Alois Mahdal) 45. Review Request 1736: Clean up imports in common (Alois Mahdal) 46. Review Request 1737: PEP8, Flake8, readability improvements (Alois Mahdal) 47. Re: Review Request 1737: PEP8, Flake8, readability improvements (Alois Mahdal) 48. Review Request 1738: journald: Fix LMI_JournalLogRecord.PerceivedSeverity (=?utf-8?b?VG9tw6HFoSBCxb5hdGVr?=) 49. Review Request 1740: Add indication testing framework (Alois Mahdal) 50. Re: Review Request 1738: journald: Fix LMI_JournalLogRecord.PerceivedSeverity (scanbot) 51. Review Request 1741: Add event-based tests for indications (basic set) (Alois Mahdal) 52. Re: Review Request 1738: journald: Fix LMI_JournalLogRecord.PerceivedSeverity (scanbot) 53. Review Request 1745: providers [1/2] LogicalFile: simulate subprocess check_output on python 2.6 (Radek Novacek) 54. Review Request 1746: providers [2/2] test base: use service instead of systemctl command (Radek Novacek) 55. Re: Review Request 1700: account: Make LMI_MemberOfGroup.CreateInstance() more robust (Radek Novacek) 56. Re: Review Request 1728: account: Don't expose the LMI_Account.UserPassword value (Radek Novacek) 57. Re: Review Request 1736: Clean up imports in common (Radek Novacek) 58. Re: Review Request 1735: Add utility classes for indication testing (Radek Novacek) 59. Re: Review Request 1738: journald: Fix LMI_JournalLogRecord.PerceivedSeverity (Radek Novacek) 60. Re: Review Request 1699: OpenLMI SSSD provider (Jan Safranek) 61. Review Request 1747: providers [1/2] Software: don't fail when logging.config doesn't have dictConfig (Radek Novacek) 62. Review Request 1748: providers [2/2] spec: use proper python sitelib in LMI_Software.reg file (Radek Novacek) 63. Re: Review Request 1647: Include profile (un)registration in the (un)register-PROVIDER make targets (Radek Novacek) 64. Re: Review Request 1647: Include profile (un)registration in the (un)register-PROVIDER make targets (Tomas Smetana) _______________________________________________ openlmi-reviews mailing list openlmi-reviews(a)lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/openlmi-reviews

1 0

Reviewboard: how to post a chain of commits?
by Alois Mahdal 14 May '14

14 May '14

Hi, I have problems with using RB correctly. What I did do and need to post for review. 1. I cloned master, created a local "feature" branch, worked, worked, etc... *eventually* ending up with 3 commits on my local branch: master < commit1 < commit2 < commit3 2. I called `rbt post commit1` (of course, using sha1) rbt reported success and printed URI, which I checked and confirmed using browser. 3. I called `rbt post commit2` *before* commit1 was reviewed rbt failed with "The file was not found in the repository (HTTP 400, API Error 207)" and left an "empty" review (i.e. without actual diff) in RB. Does this mean that RB depends on having the parent already pushed? Because if that's true, I can only think of bad solutions: * Either [A] wait (+hassle reviewers) with posting commit2 until after commit1 is reviewed + pushed to origin/master, * or [B] squash it all and post it as one huge review, * or [C] don't squash it but still post it as one huge review (specify range of commits to RBT), * or [D] base all commits on origin/master, * or [E] have a "relay" branch in a repo accessible by RB (either main repo or "personal" per-user repo for WIPs). (Please tell me I'm wrong and correct me.) What I've been advised and tried: * "try again after a while" ... I've tried ~5 times, then once next day ... no change * "open the empty in RB and upload the diff manually" ... but I ended up with the similar error: the commit that my diff decalres as parent does not exist * "look at script by vcrhonek" ... but I didn't try it since I'm not sure what it actually does From looking at code it seems to do the [C] but I don't want that since in my case I think it would make the review PITA since e.g. one commit is moving code, other is changing it and yet the commits aren't functionally relevant. So: What is the right way? Or a known workaround? Or is my workflow silly? Thanks, aL. P.S.: If you want to see the commits, it's the last 6 commits here: http://git.engineering.redhat.com/git/users/amahdal/openlmi-providers.git/l… The first one has already been posted (/r/1684/) -- Alois Mahdal <amahdal(a)redhat.com> Platform QE, BaseOS Daemons #qa, #brno, #daemons

1 0

Python coding style? (Flake8/PEP8...)
by Alois Mahdal 14 May '14

14 May '14

Hi, what is "official" stance on PEP8 or Pyflake in Python parts of OpenLMI? Or other means of static analysis? Most code I've seen does not conform to PEP8 and/or does not pass Pyflake test. **I'm not trying to say it should**, but ... in case there are no objections (or even if it's desired), I'd be happy to go and clean up at least lmi.test.* and other test modules I come along (common.py, methods.py, ...). My motivation: I use both tests to almost full extent on all my Python code (it helps me a *lot* to catch typos and design errors). Now when adding my code to existing modules, I get overwhelmed by warnings. Easiest way I can imagine is to to clean up the rest. (The next easiest way would be to set exception on particular rules but that only makes sense if it's a project-wide consent.) Any comments? Thanks, aL. -- Alois Mahdal <amahdal(a)redhat.com> Platform QE, BaseOS Daemons #qa, #brno, #daemons

3 3

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

openlmi-devel May 2014