2:04 p.m.
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------050403090704050006090708
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 05/13/2012 11:54 AM, Einav Cohen wrote:
[top posting]
GUI Mockup has been updated according to this thread:
http://www.ovirt.org/wiki/Features/PosixFSConnection#Changes_in_GUI
Further comments are welcome.
- POSIX, not Posix.
- 'POSIX compliant FS', not 'PosixFS'
- I'd be happy if we could validate whatever we pass to the mount
command against command injection[1] .
Y.
[1] https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Command_Injection
----
Thanks,
Einav
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Yair Zaslavsky"<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Einav Cohen"<ecohen(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Ayal Baron"<abaron(a)redhat.com>, engine-devel(a)ovirt.org,
"Simon Grinberg"<sgrinber(a)redhat.com>, "Saggi Mizrahi"
> <smizrahi(a)redhat.com>, "Geert Jansen"<gjansen(a)redhat.com>,
"Ori Liel"<oliel(a)redhat.com>, "Miki Kenneth"
> <mkenneth(a)redhat.com>, "Andrew Cathrow"<acathrow(a)redhat.com>
> Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 10:05:23 AM
> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] PosixFS: GUI mock-ups have been updated
>
> On 05/11/2012 11:28 PM, Einav Cohen wrote:
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Ayal Baron"<abaron(a)redhat.com>
>>> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 11:03:04 PM
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Ayal Baron"<abaron(a)redhat.com>
>>>>> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 11:39:42 AM
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>> From: "Ayal Baron"<abaron(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:46:44 PM
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>>> From: "Einav
Cohen"<ecohen(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>> To: "Andrew
Cathrow"<acathrow(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>> Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org, "Simon
Grinberg"
>>>>>>>>> <sgrinber(a)redhat.com>,
>>>>>>>>> "Saggi Mizrahi"<smizrahi(a)redhat.com>,
"Geert
>>>>>>>>> Jansen"<gjansen(a)redhat.com>, "Ori
Liel"
>>>>>>>>> <oliel(a)redhat.com>,
>>>>>>>>> "Yair
>>>>>>>>> Zaslavsky"<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>,
"Ayal Baron"
>>>>>>>>> <abaron(a)redhat.com>, "Miki
Kenneth"<mkenneth(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 2:05:55 PM
>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] PosixFS: GUI mock-ups
have
>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>> updated
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The important thing is that it's clear what
it is - eg.
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> remote/target not the local mount point. That
could be
>>>>>>>>>> accomplished
>>>>>>>>>> in the tool tip, etc.
>>>>>>>>> So if there will be a tool-tip (or similar) in the
GUI
>>>>>>>>> explaining
>>>>>>>>> what this field is supposed to be, are you OK with
>>>>>>>>> keeping
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> term
>>>>>>>>> "Path" (in both GUI and rest-api)?
>>>>>>>> I am , does everyone else agree.
>>>>>>> either 'path' or 'device'
>>>>>> - "Path" it is.
> +1 on "path" and this was my original implementation by the way.
>
>
>>>>>> - Instead of a tool-tip, I suggest to use an explanation
>>>>>> caption
>>>>>> below the text-box (similar to what we have for NFS storage
>>>>>> domain
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> see attached). Agreed?
>>>>> i.e. "Path to device to mount / remote export" or
something?
>>>> Yes, that's a good answer to the question afterwards :)
>>>> But what do you think about the general idea of using an
>>>> explanation
>>>> caption below the "Path" text-box (instead of a tool-tip that
was
>>>> suggested here earlier)?
>>>>
>>>> Also, do you think that the above should be the exact phrasing?
>>>> The
>>>> NFS one is:
>>>> "Please use 'FQDN:/path' or 'IP:/path' Example
>>>> 'server.example.com:/export/VMs'"
>>>> so maybe a "Please use" should be incorporated in this case as
>>>> well,
>>>> maybe also an example, etc.
>>>> What do you think?
>>> I replied after viewing the other message and disliking it
>>> (personal
>>> opinion). I prefer a static explanation (what the field is)
>>> rather
>>> than an action request.
>>> So in the NFS example I would've phrased it as "Remote path to NFS
>>> export, takes either the form: FQDN:/path or IP:/path, e.g.
>>> server.example.com:/export/VMs".
>>> But in any event it is better to have consistency (so both
>>> messages
>>> should probably be phrased similarly).
>> There is no problem changing the phrasing for NFS.
>>
>> So for NFS, the caption will be:
>> "Remote path to NFS export, takes either the form: FQDN:/path or
>> IP:/path, e.g. server.example.com:/export/VMs".
>>
>> And for PosixFS, the caption will be:
>> "Path to device to mount / remote export".
>> (no 'takes the form' or example provided)
>>
>> Agreed?
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> - What should be the exact phrasing of the explanation text?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "mount [-fnrsvw] [-t vfstype] [-o options] device
dir"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> device is what is being mounted and in the case of NFS is
>>>>>>> server:path
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is a reason why we termed it PosixFS and not SharedFS
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> users can specify local devices/FS's (and there is no
reason
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> limit it).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Note that if user defines a local FS and adds 2 hosts to the
>>>>>>> Posix
>>>>>>> FS
>>>>>>> DC then 1 host will be non-op
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Miki - this is not cluster level seeing as PosixFS is a DC
>>>>>>> type
>>>>>>> (afaik) so no need for tooltips about that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the future when we get rid of the single storage type in
>>>>>>> DC
>>>>>>> limitation then we'll be able to define a local posixFS
>>>>>>> domain
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> shared one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew/Geert/Simon/Ayal/Miki/Saggi/others:
Please
>>>>>>>>>>> feel
>>>>>>>>>>> free
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> suggest a new term, or vote for one of the
>>>>>>>>>>> previously-discussed
>>>>>>>>>>> terms ("Remote Path" /
"Path" / "Mount Spec" / "File
>>>>>>>>>>> System
>>>>>>>>>>> URI").
>>>>>>>>>>> If no decision will be made here, the term
will
>>>>>>>>>>> remain
>>>>>>>>>>> as-is,
>>>>>>>>>>> i.e.
>>>>>>>>>>> "Path".
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
--------------050403090704050006090708
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 05/13/2012 11:54 AM, Einav Cohen wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:7ed17043-96e5-4151-a32c-6ddb8e68d990@zmail04.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">[top posting]
GUI Mockup has been updated according to this thread:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.ovirt.org/wiki/Features/PosixFSConnection#Changes_i...
Further comments are welcome.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
- POSIX, not Posix.<br>
- 'POSIX compliant FS', not 'PosixFS' <br>
- I'd be happy if we could validate whatever we pass to the mount
command against command injection[1] .<br>
<br>
Y.<br>
[1]
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<a
href="https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Command_Injection">htt...
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:7ed17043-96e5-4151-a32c-6ddb8e68d990@zmail04.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
----
Thanks,
Einav
----- Original Message -----
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:yzaslavs@redhat.com"><yzaslavs@redhat.com></a>
To: "Einav Cohen" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:ecohen@redhat.com"><ecohen@redhat.com></a>
Cc: "Ayal Baron" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:abaron@redhat.com"><abaron@redhat.com></a>,
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:engine-devel@ovirt.org">engine-devel@ovirt.org</a>,
"Simon Grinberg" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:sgrinber@redhat.com"><sgrinber@redhat.com></a>,
"Saggi Mizrahi"
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:smizrahi@redhat.com"><smizrahi@redhat.com></a>,
"Geert Jansen" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:gjansen@redhat.com"><gjansen@redhat.com></a>,
"Ori Liel" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:oliel@redhat.com"><oliel@redhat.com></a>,
"Miki Kenneth"
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:mkenneth@redhat.com"><mkenneth@redhat.com></a>,
"Andrew Cathrow" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:acathrow@redhat.com"><acathrow@redhat.com></a>
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 10:05:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] PosixFS: GUI mock-ups have been updated
On 05/11/2012 11:28 PM, Einav Cohen wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">----- Original Message -----
From: "Ayal Baron" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:abaron@redhat.com"><abaron@redhat.com></a>
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 11:03:04 PM
----- Original Message -----
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">----- Original Message -----
From: "Ayal Baron" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:abaron@redhat.com"><abaron@redhat.com></a>
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 11:39:42 AM
----- Original Message -----
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">----- Original Message -----
From: "Ayal Baron" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:abaron@redhat.com"><abaron@redhat.com></a>
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:46:44 PM
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
----- Original Message -----
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">From: "Einav Cohen" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:ecohen@redhat.com"><ecohen@redhat.com></a>
To: "Andrew Cathrow" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:acathrow@redhat.com"><acathrow@redhat.com></a>
Cc: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:engine-devel@ovirt.org">engine-devel@ovirt.org</a>,
"Simon Grinberg"
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:sgrinber@redhat.com"><sgrinber@redhat.com></a>,
"Saggi Mizrahi" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:smizrahi@redhat.com"><smizrahi@redhat.com></a>,
"Geert
Jansen" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:gjansen@redhat.com"><gjansen@redhat.com></a>,
"Ori Liel"
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:oliel@redhat.com"><oliel@redhat.com></a>,
"Yair
Zaslavsky" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:yzaslavs@redhat.com"><yzaslavs@redhat.com></a>,
"Ayal Baron"
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:abaron@redhat.com"><abaron@redhat.com></a>,
"Miki Kenneth" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:mkenneth@redhat.com"><mkenneth@redhat.com></a>
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 2:05:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] PosixFS: GUI mock-ups have
been
updated
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">...
The important thing is that it's clear what it is - eg.
the
remote/target not the local mount point. That could be
accomplished
in the tool tip, etc.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
So if there will be a tool-tip (or similar) in the GUI
explaining
what this field is supposed to be, are you OK with
keeping
the
term
"Path" (in both GUI and rest-api)?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
I am , does everyone else agree.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
either 'path' or 'device'
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
- "Path" it is.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">+1 on "path" and this was my original
implementation by the way.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">- Instead of a tool-tip, I suggest to use
an explanation
caption
below the text-box (similar to what we have for NFS storage
domain
-
see attached). Agreed?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
i.e. "Path to device to mount / remote export" or something?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Yes, that's a good answer to the question afterwards :)
But what do you think about the general idea of using an
explanation
caption below the "Path" text-box (instead of a tool-tip that was
suggested here earlier)?
Also, do you think that the above should be the exact phrasing?
The
NFS one is:
"Please use 'FQDN:/path' or 'IP:/path' Example
'server.example.com:/export/VMs'"
so maybe a "Please use" should be incorporated in this case as
well,
maybe also an example, etc.
What do you think?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
I replied after viewing the other message and disliking it
(personal
opinion). I prefer a static explanation (what the field is)
rather
than an action request.
So in the NFS example I would've phrased it as "Remote path to NFS
export, takes either the form: FQDN:/path or IP:/path, e.g.
server.example.com:/export/VMs".
But in any event it is better to have consistency (so both
messages
should probably be phrased similarly).
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
There is no problem changing the phrasing for NFS.
So for NFS, the caption will be:
"Remote path to NFS export, takes either the form: FQDN:/path or
IP:/path, e.g. server.example.com:/export/VMs".
And for PosixFS, the caption will be:
"Path to device to mount / remote export".
(no 'takes the form' or example provided)
Agreed?
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">- What should be the exact phrasing of the
explanation text?
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">"mount [-fnrsvw] [-t vfstype] [-o
options] device dir"
device is what is being mounted and in the case of NFS is
server:path
There is a reason why we termed it PosixFS and not SharedFS
and
that
users can specify local devices/FS's (and there is no reason
to
limit it).
Note that if user defines a local FS and adds 2 hosts to the
Posix
FS
DC then 1 host will be non-op
Miki - this is not cluster level seeing as PosixFS is a DC
type
(afaik) so no need for tooltips about that.
In the future when we get rid of the single storage type in
DC
limitation then we'll be able to define a local posixFS
domain
and
a
shared one.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre
wrap="">Andrew/Geert/Simon/Ayal/Miki/Saggi/others: Please
feel
free
to
suggest a new term, or vote for one of the
previously-discussed
terms ("Remote Path" / "Path" / "Mount Spec" / "File
System
URI").
If no decision will be made here, the term will
remain
as-is,
i.e.
"Path".
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">...
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:Engine-devel@ovirt.org">Engine-devel@ovirt.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel">...
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------050403090704050006090708--