[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-17017?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17423962#comment-17423962 ]
Josh McKenzie edited comment on CASSANDRA-17017 at 10/4/21, 2:49 PM: --------------------------------------------------------------------- {quote}A comment is easier to overlook than a failing CI {quote} Given the trend with our CI pass/fail rates, I think this is debatable. :) Adding a unit test just to ensure that a command has the text it has when you originally wrote it strikes me as redundant calcification and a DRY violation. It's trivial to add it and if you're a hard no w/out it I definitely will, but this would only really make sense to me as a defensive move to protect against bad actors. If someone goes in and removes / modifies code and _ignores the comment literally adjacent to it as to why it's there and necessary_, we have bigger _cultural_ and skills problems that I don't think a failing unit test will fix. Edit: Note: I could be being needlessly stubborn here; I haven't dug into those unit tests enough to see how widespread they are, and I'm not going to plant a flag and/or die on a hill if this is the path we've taken to test the command output from our CLI stuff. Consistency trumps whatever minimal concerns I have here. was (Author: jmckenzie): {quote}A comment is easier to overlook than a failing CI {quote} Given the trend with our CI pass/fail rates, I think this is debatable. :) Adding a unit test just to ensure that a command has the text it has when you originally wrote it strikes me as redundant calcification and a DRY violation. It's trivial to add it and if you're a hard no w/out it I definitely will, but this would only really make sense to me as a defensive move to protect against bad actors. If someone goes in and removes / modifies code and _ignores the comment literally adjacent to it as to why it's there and necessary_, we have bigger _cultural_ and skills problems that I don't think a failing unit test will fix. > Add required -f / --force option to nodetool verify > --------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CASSANDRA-17017 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-17017 > Project: Cassandra > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: Tool/nodetool > Reporter: Josh McKenzie > Assignee: Josh McKenzie > Priority: Normal > > nodetool verify has some pretty significant problems with it (see > CASSANDRA-9947). > Until such time as we do the heavy(er) lift to fix the command, we should > make it harder for people to shoot themselves in the foot with it. Adding a > required "-f" flag to it with a requisite "Do you really know what you're > doing? Check out this JIRA first" seems like it'd be the right thing to do in > the interim. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: commits-h...@cassandra.apache.org