Re: [Gluster-devel] Coverity fixes

[Amar Tumballi]

One of the things I noticed is, if we make
https://scan.coverity.com/projects/gluster-glusterfs as the source of truth
for coverity issues, then the issue IDs will be constant. We can reference
them.

Also note that we should most probably focusing on 'High Impact' issues
first for sure, than the medium/low impact issues.

Regards,
Amar

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Vijay Bellur  wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Atin Mukherjee 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Fri, 3 Nov 2017 at 18:31, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/02/2017 10:19 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
>>> > While I appreciate the folks to contribute lot of coverity fixes over
>>> > last few days, I have an observation for some of the patches the
>>> > coverity issue id(s) are *not* mentioned which gets maintainers in a
>>> > difficult situation to understand the exact complaint coming out of the
>>> > coverity. From my past experience in fixing coverity defects, sometimes
>>> > the fixes might look simple but they are not.
>>> >
>>> > May I request all the developers to include the defect id in the commit
>>> > message for all the coverity fixes?
>>> >
>>>
>>> How does that work? AFAIK the defect IDs are constantly changing as some
>>> get fixed and new ones get added.
>>
>>
>> We’d need atleast (a) the defect id with pointer to the coverity link
>> which most of the devs are now following I guess but with a caveat that
>> link goes stale in 7 days and the review needs to be done by that time or
>> (b) the commit message should exactly have the coverity description which
>> is more neat.
>>
>> ( I was not knowing the fact the defect id are not constant and later on
>> got to know this from Nigel today)
>>
>>>
>>>
>
> +1 to providing a clean description of the issue rather than using a
> temporary defect ID.
>
> -Vijay
>
> ___
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel@gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>



-- 
Amar Tumballi (amarts)
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] Coverity fixes

[Vijay Bellur]

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Atin Mukherjee  wrote:

>
> On Fri, 3 Nov 2017 at 18:31, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY 
> wrote:
>
>> On 11/02/2017 10:19 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
>> > While I appreciate the folks to contribute lot of coverity fixes over
>> > last few days, I have an observation for some of the patches the
>> > coverity issue id(s) are *not* mentioned which gets maintainers in a
>> > difficult situation to understand the exact complaint coming out of the
>> > coverity. From my past experience in fixing coverity defects, sometimes
>> > the fixes might look simple but they are not.
>> >
>> > May I request all the developers to include the defect id in the commit
>> > message for all the coverity fixes?
>> >
>>
>> How does that work? AFAIK the defect IDs are constantly changing as some
>> get fixed and new ones get added.
>
>
> We’d need atleast (a) the defect id with pointer to the coverity link
> which most of the devs are now following I guess but with a caveat that
> link goes stale in 7 days and the review needs to be done by that time or
> (b) the commit message should exactly have the coverity description which
> is more neat.
>
> ( I was not knowing the fact the defect id are not constant and later on
> got to know this from Nigel today)
>
>>
>>

+1 to providing a clean description of the issue rather than using a
temporary defect ID.

-Vijay
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] Coverity fixes

[Atin Mukherjee]

On Fri, 3 Nov 2017 at 18:31, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY  wrote:

> On 11/02/2017 10:19 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
> > While I appreciate the folks to contribute lot of coverity fixes over
> > last few days, I have an observation for some of the patches the
> > coverity issue id(s) are *not* mentioned which gets maintainers in a
> > difficult situation to understand the exact complaint coming out of the
> > coverity. From my past experience in fixing coverity defects, sometimes
> > the fixes might look simple but they are not.
> >
> > May I request all the developers to include the defect id in the commit
> > message for all the coverity fixes?
> >
>
> How does that work? AFAIK the defect IDs are constantly changing as some
> get fixed and new ones get added.


We’d need atleast (a) the defect id with pointer to the coverity link which
most of the devs are now following I guess but with a caveat that link goes
stale in 7 days and the review needs to be done by that time or (b) the
commit message should exactly have the coverity description which is more
neat.

( I was not knowing the fact the defect id are not constant and later on
got to know this from Nigel today)

>
>
> (And I know everyone looks at the coverity report after their new code
> is committed to see if they might have added a new issue.)
>
> Today's defect ID 435 might be 436 or 421 tomorrow.
>
>
> --
>
> Kaleb
>
-- 
- Atin (atinm)
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] Coverity fixes

[Kaleb S. KEITHLEY]

On 11/02/2017 10:19 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
> While I appreciate the folks to contribute lot of coverity fixes over
> last few days, I have an observation for some of the patches the
> coverity issue id(s) are *not* mentioned which gets maintainers in a
> difficult situation to understand the exact complaint coming out of the
> coverity. From my past experience in fixing coverity defects, sometimes
> the fixes might look simple but they are not.
> 
> May I request all the developers to include the defect id in the commit
> message for all the coverity fixes?
> 

How does that work? AFAIK the defect IDs are constantly changing as some
get fixed and new ones get added.

(And I know everyone looks at the coverity report after their new code
is committed to see if they might have added a new issue.)

Today's defect ID 435 might be 436 or 421 tomorrow.


-- 

Kaleb
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

[Gluster-devel] Coverity fixes

[Atin Mukherjee]

While I appreciate the folks to contribute lot of coverity fixes over last
few days, I have an observation for some of the patches the coverity issue
id(s) are *not* mentioned which gets maintainers in a difficult situation
to understand the exact complaint coming out of the coverity. From my past
experience in fixing coverity defects, sometimes the fixes might look
simple but they are not.

May I request all the developers to include the defect id in the commit
message for all the coverity fixes?
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel