[ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts

[Barak Azulay]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eli Mesika" <emesika at redhat.com>
> To: "Moti Asayag" <masayag at redhat.com>
> Cc: devel at ovirt.org
> Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 4:08:45 PM
> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag at redhat.com>
> > To: "Eli Mesika" <emesika at redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs at redhat.com>, devel at ovirt.org
> > Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 7:33:06 PM
> > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Eli Mesika" <emesika at redhat.com>
> > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs at redhat.com>
> > > Cc: devel at ovirt.org
> > > Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 4:56:50 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs at redhat.com>
> > > > To: devel at ovirt.org
> > > > Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 3:20:18 PM
> > > > Subject: [ovirt-devel] Entity names in DB scripts
> > > > 
> > > > Hi all,
> > > > I have a feeling there is some inconsistency in using entity names in
> > > > the
> > > > DB
> > > > scripts.
> > > > For example, should we use Host or VDS?
> > > > I am not talking about existing tables or columns but about new ones
> > > > (and
> > > > new
> > > > stored procedures).
> > > > 
> > > > I am quite sure I saw patches containing both approaches.
> > 
> > I guess that includes any recent patches around the network area.
> > 
> > > 
> > > You are right
> > > I think old should be kept until we have the time to do a global
> > > find/replace
> > > of all old names.
> > 
> > Without enabling the "new" (or more appropriate) naming to new code we:
> > 1. Increase the amount of 'old' code in the system (gaining more debts)
> > 2. As a result - more work when and if global change will take affect.
> > 3. Double the entire work flow: code + review.
> > 
> > That change should start at some point, and having it incrementally is a
> > valid approach
> > to achieve that goal.
> 
> I basically agree, but first someone (that can say that) should say that we
> are going to do that and allocate resources to this tasks , unless , you are
> left in hybrid ugly condition



Guys please post the list of Entities and let's agree on new names.

Once this is done - each maintainer/reviewer should start enforcing that policy in his reviews.

I don't think this task should have specific task force allocated for that.

As a guide line - Those patches (rename patches) should be separated from the logic change (on top of the name change patches).


Thanks
Barak Azulay

 


> 
> > 
> > > The only place in which I encourage new names are application log/audit
> > > messages
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Yair
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Devel mailing list
> > > > Devel at ovirt.org
> > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Devel mailing list
> > > Devel at ovirt.org
> > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > > 
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> 
> 
>