Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for log: Readme file for long DN support [#1315]

2016-08-02 Thread Vu Minh Nguyen 
Hi Lennart,

Yes. The ticket number is #1898.
(https://sourceforge.net/p/opensaf/tickets/1898/)

I will update the Doc soon after this ticket is pushed. Thanks.

Regards, Vu

> -Original Message-
> From: Lennart Lund [mailto:lennart.l...@ericsson.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2016 9:02 PM
> To: Vu Minh Nguyen ;
> mahesh.va...@oracle.com
> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for log: Readme file for long
DN
> support [#1315]
> 
> Hi Vu
> 
> Do we have a ticket for updating the log PR document?
> We need to update API information  and saflogger tool information. A
> reference to OpenSAF_extensions_PR may also be added
> 
> /Lennart
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Vu Minh Nguyen [mailto:vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au]
> > Sent: den 4 juli 2016 05:07
> > To: mahesh.va...@oracle.com; Lennart Lund 
> > Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> > Subject: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for log: Readme file for long DN
> > support [#1315]
> >
> > Summary: log: Readme file for long DN support [#1315]
> > Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1315
> > Peer Reviewer(s): Mahesh, Lennart
> > Pull request to: <>
> > Affected branch(es): default
> > Development branch: default
> >
> > 
> > Impacted area   Impact y/n
> > 
> >  Docsy
> >  Build systemn
> >  RPM/packaging   n
> >  Configuration files n
> >  Startup scripts n
> >  SAF servicesn
> >  OpenSAF servicesn
> >  Core libraries  n
> >  Samples n
> >  Tests   n
> >  Other   n
> >
> >
> > Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
> > -
> >  <>
> >
> > changeset 545afb8cdc918ec8a1de92bfe03818d90d7fa968
> > Author: Vu Minh Nguyen 
> > Date:   Mon, 04 Jul 2016 10:05:02 +0700
> >
> > log: Readme file for long DN support [#1315]
> >
> > Show changes for long DN, including: 1) saflogger tool 2) log agent
> 3)
> > log
> > services 4) test suite
> >
> >
> > Added Files:
> > 
> >  osaf/services/saf/logsv/README_LONGDN
> >
> >
> > Complete diffstat:
> > --
> >  osaf/services/saf/logsv/README_LONGDN |  138
> > ++
> > ++
> > ++
> >  1 files changed, 138 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> >
> > Testing Commands:
> > -
> >  <>
> >
> >
> > Testing, Expected Results:
> > --
> >  <>
> >
> >
> > Conditions of Submission:
> > -
> >  <>
> >
> >
> > Arch  Built StartedLinux distro
> > ---
> > mipsn  n
> > mips64  n  n
> > x86 n  n
> > x86_64  n  n
> > 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

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for log: Readme file for long DN support [#1315]

2016-08-02 Thread Lennart Lund 
Hi Vu

Do we have a ticket for updating the log PR document?
We need to update API information  and saflogger tool information. A reference 
to OpenSAF_extensions_PR may also be added

/Lennart

> -Original Message-
> From: Vu Minh Nguyen [mailto:vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au]
> Sent: den 4 juli 2016 05:07
> To: mahesh.va...@oracle.com; Lennart Lund 
> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for log: Readme file for long DN
> support [#1315]
> 
> Summary: log: Readme file for long DN support [#1315]
> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1315
> Peer Reviewer(s): Mahesh, Lennart
> Pull request to: <>
> Affected branch(es): default
> Development branch: default
> 
> 
> Impacted area   Impact y/n
> 
>  Docsy
>  Build systemn
>  RPM/packaging   n
>  Configuration files n
>  Startup scripts n
>  SAF servicesn
>  OpenSAF servicesn
>  Core libraries  n
>  Samples n
>  Tests   n
>  Other   n
> 
> 
> Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
> -
>  <>
> 
> changeset 545afb8cdc918ec8a1de92bfe03818d90d7fa968
> Author:   Vu Minh Nguyen 
> Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2016 10:05:02 +0700
> 
>   log: Readme file for long DN support [#1315]
> 
>   Show changes for long DN, including: 1) saflogger tool 2) log agent 3)
> log
>   services 4) test suite
> 
> 
> Added Files:
> 
>  osaf/services/saf/logsv/README_LONGDN
> 
> 
> Complete diffstat:
> --
>  osaf/services/saf/logsv/README_LONGDN |  138
> ++
> ++
> ++
>  1 files changed, 138 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> 
> Testing Commands:
> -
>  <>
> 
> 
> Testing, Expected Results:
> --
>  <>
> 
> 
> Conditions of Submission:
> -
>  <>
> 
> 
> Arch  Built StartedLinux distro
> ---
> mipsn  n
> mips64  n  n
> x86 n  n
> x86_64  n  n
> 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.

[devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for log: Readme file for long DN support [#1315]

2016-07-03 Thread Vu Minh Nguyen 
Summary: log: Readme file for long DN support [#1315]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1315
Peer Reviewer(s): Mahesh, Lennart
Pull request to: <>
Affected branch(es): default
Development branch: default


Impacted area   Impact y/n

 Docsy
 Build systemn
 RPM/packaging   n
 Configuration files n
 Startup scripts n
 SAF servicesn
 OpenSAF servicesn
 Core libraries  n
 Samples n
 Tests   n
 Other   n


Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
-
 <>

changeset 545afb8cdc918ec8a1de92bfe03818d90d7fa968
Author: Vu Minh Nguyen 
Date:   Mon, 04 Jul 2016 10:05:02 +0700

log: Readme file for long DN support [#1315]

Show changes for long DN, including: 1) saflogger tool 2) log agent 3) 
log
services 4) test suite


Added Files:

 osaf/services/saf/logsv/README_LONGDN


Complete diffstat:
--
 osaf/services/saf/logsv/README_LONGDN |  138 
++
 1 files changed, 138 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-
 <>


Testing, Expected Results:
--
 <>


Conditions of Submission:
-
 <>


Arch  Built StartedLinux distro
---
mipsn  n
mips64  n  n
x86 n  n
x86_64  n  n
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.


--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel