Re: [Engine-devel] PosixFS: GUI mock-ups have been updated

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&gt; >> To: "Einav Cohen" <ecohen(a)redhat.com&gt; >> Cc: "Ayal Baron" <abaron(a)redhat.com&gt;, engine-devel(a)ovirt.org, "Simon Grinberg" <sgrinber(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Saggi Mizrahi" >> <smizrahi(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Geert Jansen" <gjansen(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Ori Liel" <oliel(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Miki Kenneth" >> <mkenneth(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Andrew Cathrow" <acathrow(a)redhat.com&gt; >> 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&gt; >>>> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 11:03:04 PM >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: "Ayal Baron" <abaron(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 11:39:42 AM >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>> From: "Ayal Baron" <abaron(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:46:44 PM >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>>>> From: "Einav Cohen" <ecohen(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>>>>> To: "Andrew Cathrow" <acathrow(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>>>>> Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org, "Simon Grinberg" >>>>>>>>>> <sgrinber(a)redhat.com&gt;, >>>>>>>>>> "Saggi Mizrahi" <smizrahi(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Geert >>>>>>>>>> Jansen" <gjansen(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Ori Liel" >>>>>>>>>> <oliel(a)redhat.com&gt;, >>>>>>>>>> "Yair >>>>>>>>>> Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Ayal Baron" >>>>>>>>>> <abaron(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Miki Kenneth" <mkenneth(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>>>>> 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