ack, (not tested)/BR HansN On 11/25/13 16:12, nagendr...@oracle.com wrote: > Summary: amfd: Decrement num_attributes when last attrValue is deleted [#302] > Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #302 > Peer Reviewer(s): Hans F, Hans N > Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>> > Affected branch(es): All > Development branch: Default > > -------------------------------- > Impacted area Impact y/n > -------------------------------- > Docs n > Build system n > RPM/packaging n > Configuration files n > Startup scripts n > SAF services y > OpenSAF services n > Core libraries n > Samples n > Tests n > Other n > > > Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): > --------------------------------------------- > <<EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE>> > > changeset fde0ad4e97928c22038d65c1607a99b6c71df787 > Author: Nagendra Kumar<nagendr...@oracle.com> > Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 20:40:18 +0530 > > amfd: Decrement num_attributes when last attrValue is deleted [#302] > > > Complete diffstat: > ------------------ > osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/csiattr.cc | 2 ++ > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > Testing Commands: > ----------------- > immcfg -f /tmp/AppConfig-2N.xml > immcfg -c SaAmfCSIAttribute > safCsiAttr=Attr1,safCsi=AmfDemo,safSi=AmfDemo,safApp=AmfDemo1 -a > saAmfCSIAttriValue=val1 > immcfg -a saAmfCSIAttriValue-=val1 > safCsiAttr=Attr1,safCsi=AmfDemo,safSi=AmfDemo,safApp=AmfDemo1 > > immcfg -a saAmfCSIAttriValue+=val2 > safCsiAttr=Attr1,safCsi=AmfDemo,safSi=AmfDemo,safApp=AmfDemo1 > > immcfg -a saAmfCSIAttriValue+=val3 > safCsiAttr=Attr1,safCsi=AmfDemo,safSi=AmfDemo,safApp=AmfDemo1 > amf-adm unlock-in safSu=SU1,safSg=AmfDemo,safApp=AmfDemo1 > amf-adm unlock safSu=SU1,safSg=AmfDemo,safApp=AmfDemo1 > > > Testing, Expected Results: > -------------------------- > Callback should deliver only val2 and val3 as attrValue. > > > Conditions of Submission: > ------------------------- > Ack from peer reviewers > > > Arch Built Started Linux distro > ------------------------------------------- > mips n n > mips64 n n > x86 n n > x86_64 y y > powerpc n n > powerpc64 n n > > > Reviewer Checklist: > ------------------- > [Submitters: make sure that your review doesn't trigger any checkmarks!] > > > Your checkin has not passed review because (see checked entries): > > ___ Your RR template is generally incomplete; it has too many blank entries > that need proper data filled in. > > ___ You have failed to nominate the proper persons for review and push. > > ___ Your patches do not have proper short+long header > > ___ You have grammar/spelling in your header that is unacceptable. > > ___ You have exceeded a sensible line length in your headers/comments/text. > > ___ You have failed to put in a proper Trac Ticket # into your commits. > > ___ You have incorrectly put/left internal data in your comments/files > (i.e. internal bug tracking tool IDs, product names etc) > > ___ You have not given any evidence of testing beyond basic build tests. > Demonstrate some level of runtime or other sanity testing. > > ___ You have ^M present in some of your files. These have to be removed. > > ___ You have needlessly changed whitespace or added whitespace crimes > like trailing spaces, or spaces before tabs. > > ___ You have mixed real technical changes with whitespace and other > cosmetic code cleanup changes. These have to be separate commits. > > ___ You need to refactor your submission into logical chunks; there is > too much content into a single commit. > > ___ You have extraneous garbage in your review (merge commits etc) > > ___ You have giant attachments which should never have been sent; > Instead you should place your content in a public tree to be pulled. > > ___ You have too many commits attached to an e-mail; resend as threaded > commits, or place in a public tree for a pull. > > ___ You have resent this content multiple times without a clear indication > of what has changed between each re-send. > > ___ You have failed to adequately and individually address all of the > comments and change requests that were proposed in the initial review. > > ___ You have a misconfigured ~/.hgrc file (i.e. username, email etc) > > ___ Your computer have a badly configured date and time; confusing the > the threaded patch review. > > ___ Your changes affect IPC mechanism, and you don't present any results > for in-service upgradability test. > > ___ Your changes affect user manual and documentation, your patch series > do not contain the patch that updates the Doxygen manual. >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation. Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers strategic insight and game-changing conversations that shape the rapidly evolving mobile landscape. Sign up now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63431311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel