You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com> on 2013/07/16 10:52:40 UTC
Re: Git Push Summary
Thanks Isaac for creating this branch. I'll keep an eye on the commits you
make your here . Once the code for handling nested query API calls are
ready , you can merge it into master.
@Jessica - I have had conversations with Isaac and he is in the process of
re-factoring the code for dedicated resources to handle the nested query
API calls . You could review it once as well when he sends out a request
for merge . It should not be a big change though !
Thanks,
Pranav
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:00 PM, <is...@apache.org> wrote:
> Updated Branches:
> refs/heads/ui-dedicatedresources-refactoring [created] 22ddc3fa0
>
Re: Git Push Summary
Posted by Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Isaac for making the relevant code changes there. I think you
probably committed it only to master . You would need to cherry-pick it up
to asf/4.2 as well . Otherwise the changes you have made look good and in
accordance with the workflow we discussed .
Regards,
Pranav
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Saksham Srivastava <
saksham.srivastava@citrix.com> wrote:
> Not there in 4.2?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Isaac Chiang [mailto:isaacchiang@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 3:12 PM
> To: Pranav Saxena
> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Git Push Summary
>
> Hi all,
> I've been working on re-factoring the dedication UI code in these
> days and just finished.
> I discussed the requirements with Pranav before. The changes are listed as
> following:
>
> 1. zone wizard: (JIRA ticket :
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-3700)
>
> Add a dedication step to activating zone process with rules as:
> (A) if the user check the "dedicate" checkbox and provide correct
> account information, the wizard will have an extra dedicating step
> when activating the newly created zone(show in the
> activating steps).
> (B) if the user check the "dedicate" checkbox and provide
> incorrect account information, the wizard will return to "Setup Zone" step.
> Let
>
> the user has the opportunity to modify the acc or uncheck
> the "dedicate" checkbox. It runs into two cases after the user click on fix
> error through the wizard:
> (a) If the user unchecks the "dedicate" checkbox this time,
> the wizard will continue to finish the rest of the activating process
> without
> showing the dedicating step.
> (b) If the user provides the correct account this time, the
> wizard will process the dedicating step again(show in the wizard) and
> finish the rest of activating process
>
> 2. Create pod/cluster/host from dialog: (JIRA ticket :
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-3388)
> Fix the dedication code to fit asynchronous dedication api commands.
> The UI now shows correct notification message for the dedication operation.
>
> Please let me know if you have any concerns, thanks! :)
>
>
> Regards
>
> Isaac
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Isaac Chiang <isaacchiang@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Hi Pranav,
> > I'll do more tests before applying the code to master in next
> > few days. Since the UI code has been re-formatted yesterday, I'd like
> > to copy/paste the modified part into master instead of merging the
> branch.
> > Thanks for all the help and advice :)
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hey Isaac ,
> >>
> >> I verified your code changes in your private asf branch . The code
> >> changes look good to me. I am assuming that it would work fine for
> >> the following cases -
> >> 1) Dedication is a success , addition of resource is a success
> >> 2) Dedication is a failure , addition of resource is still a success
> >> 3) Dedication is a failure , addition is also a failure
> >>
> >> - All 3 cases should have notification displayed for each of the API
> >> calls getting triggered ( which I believe would be there after your
> >> code
> >> changes)
> >> - Also you could provide a "setInterval" waiting time function of
> >> say
> >> 2-3 seconds between two successive notifications.
> >>
> >> One thing which I realized after looking at your code changes is that
> >> you would have to bear the pain of resolving the merge conflicts when
> >> you merge your branch with master. Since your code
> >> modifications/additions have been done on the already existing code ,
> >> I am pretty sure you would have to take care of these conflicts.
> >> Since the changes aren't that huge, you could manually copy them to
> >> the master branch or replace the entire system.js file in your branch
> >> in the master assuming you forked your branch out of master and there
> >> haven't been other changes in system.js file . First option is a safer
> approach though !!
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Pranav
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Isaac Chiang <isaacchiang@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Pranav:
> >>> I just pushed part of modified code in to the branch.
> >>> Please have a look if the commit fix the issue as expected.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >>> From: Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com>
> >>> Date: Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:52 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: Git Push Summary
> >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org, jessica.wang@citrix.com,
> >>> sonny.chhen@citrix.com
> >>> Cc: commits@cloudstack.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks Isaac for creating this branch. I'll keep an eye on the
> >>> commits you make your here . Once the code for handling nested query
> >>> API calls are ready , you can merge it into master.
> >>>
> >>> @Jessica - I have had conversations with Isaac and he is in the
> >>> process of re-factoring the code for dedicated resources to handle
> >>> the nested query API calls . You could review it once as well when
> >>> he sends out a request for merge . It should not be a big change
> >>> though !
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Pranav
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:00 PM, <is...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > Updated Branches:
> >>> > refs/heads/ui-dedicatedresources-refactoring [created] 22ddc3fa0
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
Re: Git Push Summary
Posted by Isaac Chiang <is...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I've cherry-picked these two commits into 4.2 branch.
Thanks
Isaac
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Saksham Srivastava <
saksham.srivastava@citrix.com> wrote:
> Not there in 4.2?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Isaac Chiang [mailto:isaacchiang@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 3:12 PM
> To: Pranav Saxena
> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Git Push Summary
>
> Hi all,
> I've been working on re-factoring the dedication UI code in these
> days and just finished.
> I discussed the requirements with Pranav before. The changes are listed as
> following:
>
> 1. zone wizard: (JIRA ticket :
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-3700)
>
> Add a dedication step to activating zone process with rules as:
> (A) if the user check the "dedicate" checkbox and provide correct
> account information, the wizard will have an extra dedicating step
> when activating the newly created zone(show in the
> activating steps).
> (B) if the user check the "dedicate" checkbox and provide
> incorrect account information, the wizard will return to "Setup Zone" step.
> Let
>
> the user has the opportunity to modify the acc or uncheck
> the "dedicate" checkbox. It runs into two cases after the user click on fix
> error through the wizard:
> (a) If the user unchecks the "dedicate" checkbox this time,
> the wizard will continue to finish the rest of the activating process
> without
> showing the dedicating step.
> (b) If the user provides the correct account this time, the
> wizard will process the dedicating step again(show in the wizard) and
> finish the rest of activating process
>
> 2. Create pod/cluster/host from dialog: (JIRA ticket :
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-3388)
> Fix the dedication code to fit asynchronous dedication api commands.
> The UI now shows correct notification message for the dedication operation.
>
> Please let me know if you have any concerns, thanks! :)
>
>
> Regards
>
> Isaac
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Isaac Chiang <isaacchiang@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Hi Pranav,
> > I'll do more tests before applying the code to master in next
> > few days. Since the UI code has been re-formatted yesterday, I'd like
> > to copy/paste the modified part into master instead of merging the
> branch.
> > Thanks for all the help and advice :)
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hey Isaac ,
> >>
> >> I verified your code changes in your private asf branch . The code
> >> changes look good to me. I am assuming that it would work fine for
> >> the following cases -
> >> 1) Dedication is a success , addition of resource is a success
> >> 2) Dedication is a failure , addition of resource is still a success
> >> 3) Dedication is a failure , addition is also a failure
> >>
> >> - All 3 cases should have notification displayed for each of the API
> >> calls getting triggered ( which I believe would be there after your
> >> code
> >> changes)
> >> - Also you could provide a "setInterval" waiting time function of
> >> say
> >> 2-3 seconds between two successive notifications.
> >>
> >> One thing which I realized after looking at your code changes is that
> >> you would have to bear the pain of resolving the merge conflicts when
> >> you merge your branch with master. Since your code
> >> modifications/additions have been done on the already existing code ,
> >> I am pretty sure you would have to take care of these conflicts.
> >> Since the changes aren't that huge, you could manually copy them to
> >> the master branch or replace the entire system.js file in your branch
> >> in the master assuming you forked your branch out of master and there
> >> haven't been other changes in system.js file . First option is a safer
> approach though !!
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Pranav
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Isaac Chiang <isaacchiang@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Pranav:
> >>> I just pushed part of modified code in to the branch.
> >>> Please have a look if the commit fix the issue as expected.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >>> From: Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com>
> >>> Date: Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:52 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: Git Push Summary
> >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org, jessica.wang@citrix.com,
> >>> sonny.chhen@citrix.com
> >>> Cc: commits@cloudstack.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks Isaac for creating this branch. I'll keep an eye on the
> >>> commits you make your here . Once the code for handling nested query
> >>> API calls are ready , you can merge it into master.
> >>>
> >>> @Jessica - I have had conversations with Isaac and he is in the
> >>> process of re-factoring the code for dedicated resources to handle
> >>> the nested query API calls . You could review it once as well when
> >>> he sends out a request for merge . It should not be a big change
> >>> though !
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Pranav
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:00 PM, <is...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > Updated Branches:
> >>> > refs/heads/ui-dedicatedresources-refactoring [created] 22ddc3fa0
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
RE: Git Push Summary
Posted by Saksham Srivastava <sa...@citrix.com>.
Not there in 4.2?
-----Original Message-----
From: Isaac Chiang [mailto:isaacchiang@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 3:12 PM
To: Pranav Saxena
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Git Push Summary
Hi all,
I've been working on re-factoring the dedication UI code in these days and just finished.
I discussed the requirements with Pranav before. The changes are listed as
following:
1. zone wizard: (JIRA ticket :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-3700)
Add a dedication step to activating zone process with rules as:
(A) if the user check the "dedicate" checkbox and provide correct account information, the wizard will have an extra dedicating step
when activating the newly created zone(show in the activating steps).
(B) if the user check the "dedicate" checkbox and provide incorrect account information, the wizard will return to "Setup Zone" step. Let
the user has the opportunity to modify the acc or uncheck the "dedicate" checkbox. It runs into two cases after the user click on fix
error through the wizard:
(a) If the user unchecks the "dedicate" checkbox this time, the wizard will continue to finish the rest of the activating process without
showing the dedicating step.
(b) If the user provides the correct account this time, the wizard will process the dedicating step again(show in the wizard) and
finish the rest of activating process
2. Create pod/cluster/host from dialog: (JIRA ticket :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-3388)
Fix the dedication code to fit asynchronous dedication api commands.
The UI now shows correct notification message for the dedication operation.
Please let me know if you have any concerns, thanks! :)
Regards
Isaac
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Isaac Chiang <is...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi Pranav,
> I'll do more tests before applying the code to master in next
> few days. Since the UI code has been re-formatted yesterday, I'd like
> to copy/paste the modified part into master instead of merging the branch.
> Thanks for all the help and advice :)
>
> Regards
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey Isaac ,
>>
>> I verified your code changes in your private asf branch . The code
>> changes look good to me. I am assuming that it would work fine for
>> the following cases -
>> 1) Dedication is a success , addition of resource is a success
>> 2) Dedication is a failure , addition of resource is still a success
>> 3) Dedication is a failure , addition is also a failure
>>
>> - All 3 cases should have notification displayed for each of the API
>> calls getting triggered ( which I believe would be there after your
>> code
>> changes)
>> - Also you could provide a "setInterval" waiting time function of
>> say
>> 2-3 seconds between two successive notifications.
>>
>> One thing which I realized after looking at your code changes is that
>> you would have to bear the pain of resolving the merge conflicts when
>> you merge your branch with master. Since your code
>> modifications/additions have been done on the already existing code ,
>> I am pretty sure you would have to take care of these conflicts.
>> Since the changes aren't that huge, you could manually copy them to
>> the master branch or replace the entire system.js file in your branch
>> in the master assuming you forked your branch out of master and there
>> haven't been other changes in system.js file . First option is a safer approach though !!
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Pranav
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Isaac Chiang <is...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Pranav:
>>> I just pushed part of modified code in to the branch.
>>> Please have a look if the commit fix the issue as expected.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com>
>>> Date: Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:52 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Git Push Summary
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org, jessica.wang@citrix.com,
>>> sonny.chhen@citrix.com
>>> Cc: commits@cloudstack.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks Isaac for creating this branch. I'll keep an eye on the
>>> commits you make your here . Once the code for handling nested query
>>> API calls are ready , you can merge it into master.
>>>
>>> @Jessica - I have had conversations with Isaac and he is in the
>>> process of re-factoring the code for dedicated resources to handle
>>> the nested query API calls . You could review it once as well when
>>> he sends out a request for merge . It should not be a big change
>>> though !
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Pranav
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:00 PM, <is...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Updated Branches:
>>> > refs/heads/ui-dedicatedresources-refactoring [created] 22ddc3fa0
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>
RE: Git Push Summary
Posted by Saksham Srivastava <sa...@citrix.com>.
Isaac, I tried some of your changes. Looks good.
Regards,
Saksham
-----Original Message-----
From: Isaac Chiang [mailto:isaacchiang@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 3:12 PM
To: Pranav Saxena
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Git Push Summary
Hi all,
I've been working on re-factoring the dedication UI code in these days and just finished.
I discussed the requirements with Pranav before. The changes are listed as
following:
1. zone wizard: (JIRA ticket :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-3700)
Add a dedication step to activating zone process with rules as:
(A) if the user check the "dedicate" checkbox and provide correct account information, the wizard will have an extra dedicating step
when activating the newly created zone(show in the activating steps).
(B) if the user check the "dedicate" checkbox and provide incorrect account information, the wizard will return to "Setup Zone" step. Let
the user has the opportunity to modify the acc or uncheck the "dedicate" checkbox. It runs into two cases after the user click on fix
error through the wizard:
(a) If the user unchecks the "dedicate" checkbox this time, the wizard will continue to finish the rest of the activating process without
showing the dedicating step.
(b) If the user provides the correct account this time, the wizard will process the dedicating step again(show in the wizard) and
finish the rest of activating process
2. Create pod/cluster/host from dialog: (JIRA ticket :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-3388)
Fix the dedication code to fit asynchronous dedication api commands.
The UI now shows correct notification message for the dedication operation.
Please let me know if you have any concerns, thanks! :)
Regards
Isaac
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Isaac Chiang <is...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi Pranav,
> I'll do more tests before applying the code to master in next
> few days. Since the UI code has been re-formatted yesterday, I'd like
> to copy/paste the modified part into master instead of merging the branch.
> Thanks for all the help and advice :)
>
> Regards
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey Isaac ,
>>
>> I verified your code changes in your private asf branch . The code
>> changes look good to me. I am assuming that it would work fine for
>> the following cases -
>> 1) Dedication is a success , addition of resource is a success
>> 2) Dedication is a failure , addition of resource is still a success
>> 3) Dedication is a failure , addition is also a failure
>>
>> - All 3 cases should have notification displayed for each of the API
>> calls getting triggered ( which I believe would be there after your
>> code
>> changes)
>> - Also you could provide a "setInterval" waiting time function of
>> say
>> 2-3 seconds between two successive notifications.
>>
>> One thing which I realized after looking at your code changes is that
>> you would have to bear the pain of resolving the merge conflicts when
>> you merge your branch with master. Since your code
>> modifications/additions have been done on the already existing code ,
>> I am pretty sure you would have to take care of these conflicts.
>> Since the changes aren't that huge, you could manually copy them to
>> the master branch or replace the entire system.js file in your branch
>> in the master assuming you forked your branch out of master and there
>> haven't been other changes in system.js file . First option is a safer approach though !!
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Pranav
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Isaac Chiang <is...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Pranav:
>>> I just pushed part of modified code in to the branch.
>>> Please have a look if the commit fix the issue as expected.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com>
>>> Date: Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:52 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Git Push Summary
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org, jessica.wang@citrix.com,
>>> sonny.chhen@citrix.com
>>> Cc: commits@cloudstack.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks Isaac for creating this branch. I'll keep an eye on the
>>> commits you make your here . Once the code for handling nested query
>>> API calls are ready , you can merge it into master.
>>>
>>> @Jessica - I have had conversations with Isaac and he is in the
>>> process of re-factoring the code for dedicated resources to handle
>>> the nested query API calls . You could review it once as well when
>>> he sends out a request for merge . It should not be a big change
>>> though !
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Pranav
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:00 PM, <is...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Updated Branches:
>>> > refs/heads/ui-dedicatedresources-refactoring [created] 22ddc3fa0
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Git Push Summary
Posted by Isaac Chiang <is...@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
I've been working on re-factoring the dedication UI code in these
days and just finished.
I discussed the requirements with Pranav before. The changes are listed as
following:
1. zone wizard: (JIRA ticket :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-3700)
Add a dedication step to activating zone process with rules as:
(A) if the user check the "dedicate" checkbox and provide correct
account information, the wizard will have an extra dedicating step
when activating the newly created zone(show in the activating
steps).
(B) if the user check the "dedicate" checkbox and provide incorrect
account information, the wizard will return to "Setup Zone" step. Let
the user has the opportunity to modify the acc or uncheck the
"dedicate" checkbox. It runs into two cases after the user click on fix
error through the wizard:
(a) If the user unchecks the "dedicate" checkbox this time,
the wizard will continue to finish the rest of the activating process
without
showing the dedicating step.
(b) If the user provides the correct account this time, the
wizard will process the dedicating step again(show in the wizard) and
finish the rest of activating process
2. Create pod/cluster/host from dialog: (JIRA ticket :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-3388)
Fix the dedication code to fit asynchronous dedication api commands.
The UI now shows correct notification message for the dedication operation.
Please let me know if you have any concerns, thanks! :)
Regards
Isaac
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Isaac Chiang <is...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi Pranav,
> I'll do more tests before applying the code to master in next few
> days. Since the UI code has been re-formatted yesterday, I'd like to
> copy/paste the modified part into master instead of merging the branch.
> Thanks for all the help and advice :)
>
> Regards
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey Isaac ,
>>
>> I verified your code changes in your private asf branch . The code
>> changes look good to me. I am assuming that it would work fine for the
>> following cases -
>> 1) Dedication is a success , addition of resource is a success
>> 2) Dedication is a failure , addition of resource is still a success
>> 3) Dedication is a failure , addition is also a failure
>>
>> - All 3 cases should have notification displayed for each of the API
>> calls getting triggered ( which I believe would be there after your code
>> changes)
>> - Also you could provide a "setInterval" waiting time function of say
>> 2-3 seconds between two successive notifications.
>>
>> One thing which I realized after looking at your code changes is that you
>> would have to bear the pain of resolving the merge conflicts when you merge
>> your branch with master. Since your code modifications/additions have been
>> done on the already existing code , I am pretty sure you would have to take
>> care of these conflicts. Since the changes aren't that huge, you could
>> manually copy them to the master branch or replace the entire system.js
>> file in your branch in the master assuming you forked your branch out of
>> master and there haven't been other changes in system.js file . First
>> option is a safer approach though !!
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Pranav
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Isaac Chiang <is...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Pranav:
>>> I just pushed part of modified code in to the branch.
>>> Please have a look if the commit fix the issue as expected.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com>
>>> Date: Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:52 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Git Push Summary
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org, jessica.wang@citrix.com,
>>> sonny.chhen@citrix.com
>>> Cc: commits@cloudstack.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks Isaac for creating this branch. I'll keep an eye on the commits
>>> you
>>> make your here . Once the code for handling nested query API calls are
>>> ready , you can merge it into master.
>>>
>>> @Jessica - I have had conversations with Isaac and he is in the process
>>> of
>>> re-factoring the code for dedicated resources to handle the nested query
>>> API calls . You could review it once as well when he sends out a request
>>> for merge . It should not be a big change though !
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Pranav
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:00 PM, <is...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Updated Branches:
>>> > refs/heads/ui-dedicatedresources-refactoring [created] 22ddc3fa0
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Git Push Summary
Posted by Isaac Chiang <is...@gmail.com>.
Hi Pranav,
I'll do more tests before applying the code to master in next few
days. Since the UI code has been re-formatted yesterday, I'd like to
copy/paste the modified part into master instead of merging the branch.
Thanks for all the help and advice :)
Regards
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Isaac ,
>
> I verified your code changes in your private asf branch . The code changes
> look good to me. I am assuming that it would work fine for the following
> cases -
> 1) Dedication is a success , addition of resource is a success
> 2) Dedication is a failure , addition of resource is still a success
> 3) Dedication is a failure , addition is also a failure
>
> - All 3 cases should have notification displayed for each of the API
> calls getting triggered ( which I believe would be there after your code
> changes)
> - Also you could provide a "setInterval" waiting time function of say 2-3
> seconds between two successive notifications.
>
> One thing which I realized after looking at your code changes is that you
> would have to bear the pain of resolving the merge conflicts when you merge
> your branch with master. Since your code modifications/additions have been
> done on the already existing code , I am pretty sure you would have to take
> care of these conflicts. Since the changes aren't that huge, you could
> manually copy them to the master branch or replace the entire system.js
> file in your branch in the master assuming you forked your branch out of
> master and there haven't been other changes in system.js file . First
> option is a safer approach though !!
>
> Thanks,
> Pranav
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Isaac Chiang <is...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi Pranav:
>> I just pushed part of modified code in to the branch.
>> Please have a look if the commit fix the issue as expected.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com>
>> Date: Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:52 PM
>> Subject: Re: Git Push Summary
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org, jessica.wang@citrix.com,
>> sonny.chhen@citrix.com
>> Cc: commits@cloudstack.apache.org
>>
>>
>> Thanks Isaac for creating this branch. I'll keep an eye on the commits you
>> make your here . Once the code for handling nested query API calls are
>> ready , you can merge it into master.
>>
>> @Jessica - I have had conversations with Isaac and he is in the process of
>> re-factoring the code for dedicated resources to handle the nested query
>> API calls . You could review it once as well when he sends out a request
>> for merge . It should not be a big change though !
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Pranav
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:00 PM, <is...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Updated Branches:
>> > refs/heads/ui-dedicatedresources-refactoring [created] 22ddc3fa0
>> >
>>
>>
>
Re: Git Push Summary
Posted by Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com>.
Hey Isaac ,
I verified your code changes in your private asf branch . The code changes
look good to me. I am assuming that it would work fine for the following
cases -
1) Dedication is a success , addition of resource is a success
2) Dedication is a failure , addition of resource is still a success
3) Dedication is a failure , addition is also a failure
- All 3 cases should have notification displayed for each of the API calls
getting triggered ( which I believe would be there after your code changes)
- Also you could provide a "setInterval" waiting time function of say 2-3
seconds between two successive notifications.
One thing which I realized after looking at your code changes is that you
would have to bear the pain of resolving the merge conflicts when you merge
your branch with master. Since your code modifications/additions have been
done on the already existing code , I am pretty sure you would have to take
care of these conflicts. Since the changes aren't that huge, you could
manually copy them to the master branch or replace the entire system.js
file in your branch in the master assuming you forked your branch out of
master and there haven't been other changes in system.js file . First
option is a safer approach though !!
Thanks,
Pranav
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Isaac Chiang <is...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Pranav:
> I just pushed part of modified code in to the branch.
> Please have a look if the commit fix the issue as expected.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Regards
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Pranav Saxena <ps...@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:52 PM
> Subject: Re: Git Push Summary
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org, jessica.wang@citrix.com,
> sonny.chhen@citrix.com
> Cc: commits@cloudstack.apache.org
>
>
> Thanks Isaac for creating this branch. I'll keep an eye on the commits you
> make your here . Once the code for handling nested query API calls are
> ready , you can merge it into master.
>
> @Jessica - I have had conversations with Isaac and he is in the process of
> re-factoring the code for dedicated resources to handle the nested query
> API calls . You could review it once as well when he sends out a request
> for merge . It should not be a big change though !
>
> Thanks,
> Pranav
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:00 PM, <is...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Updated Branches:
> > refs/heads/ui-dedicatedresources-refactoring [created] 22ddc3fa0
> >
>
>