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

Sun May 13 11:04:59 UTC 2012

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20120513/c574551b/attachment-0002.html>