Scripting guidelines

[David Caro]

El 21/02/14 00:40, Alon Bar-Lev escribió:
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "David Caro" <dcaroest at redhat.com>
>> To: "infra" <infra at ovirt.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 10:52:23 PM
>> Subject: Scripting guidelines
>>
>> Hi everyone!
>>
>> Lately I've had a hard time to properly review some patches containing shell
>> scripts to manage our infrastructure because there's no guidelines. So I
>> created
>> a wiki page with a proposal [1]. It's made up as a mix of some already
>> existing
>> guidelines.
>>
>> The reason to wrote a bash style guide and not a shell stile guide is because
>> I
>> think that bash is widely adopted (default GNU shell) and provides enough
>> advantages to sacrifice some portability. I think that most of our
>> maintenance
>> and management scripts will never be run on non-GNU OSes.
>>
>> POSIX compliance should be only used when really needed, for example, scripts
>> to
>> build a specific project, that might be run on non-GNU based systems in the
>> far
>> future.
>>
>> This thread is to start a discussion about it so please, share your opinions
>> and
>> concerns (and proposals).
> 
> We already discussed that, I think it is wrong for trivial scripts to use bash.
> No need to discuss that over and over.
> 
> The problem is that there is nobody to have authority to decide anything.
> Open Source is not anarchy nor democracy, there should be strict hierarchy.
> And we lack that, so anarchy is in action.

From the company you work for, and a pretty old and active participation on open
source projects, Dave (cc'd) seems to disagree with your view of open source
management:

https://opensource.com/business/11/2/leadership-open-source-communities

"""
So how are open source communities led? Largely by the people doing the work.
Most groups have a loosely defined common goal (build software widgets, or
develop a awesome, open source, computer-based fourth grade math curriculum),
and decisions are made by the people doing the work. There's no manager in place
dictating edicts about how things must be done or what objectives to seek after.
Many people object to this method, call it anarchy, and claim that it impedes
progress. It's true that if the same set of people was coerced into a single
direction, they might make more progress, but there likely wouldn't be the same
level of innovation.
"""


> 
> As for infra, it is not part of anything we distribute so it is not that important, however, standards compliance is something that should be considered.
> 
>>
>>
>> [1] http://www.ovirt.org/Bash_style_guide
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>> --
>> David Caro
>>
>> Red Hat S.L.
>> Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D
>>
>> Email: dcaro at redhat.com
>> Web: www.redhat.com
>> RHT Global #: 82-62605
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Infra mailing list
>> Infra at ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
>>


-- 
David Caro

Red Hat S.L.
Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D

Email: dcaro at redhat.com
Web: www.redhat.com
RHT Global #: 82-62605

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/infra/attachments/20140221/5ec4ddf1/attachment.sig>