You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geode.apache.org by Patrick Rhomberg <pr...@apache.org> on 2018/03/19 18:46:20 UTC
[Proposal] Gfsh Command Feature Flag Annotation
Hello, All
I am interested in extending annotation functionality on our gfsh
commands, particularly with respect to feature-flagging commands that are
mutually-reliant or not yet feature complete.
Please review the proposal [1] at your convenience.
Imagination is Change.
~Patrick Rhomberg
[1]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Proposal+for+Gfsh+Feature+Flag
Re: [Proposal] Gfsh Command Feature Flag Annotation
Posted by Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org>.
Adding or removing options from a SpringShell command may be a bit tricky.
This might require two versions of the command -- one version with the
option, one without -- and we then load and register only one at runtime.
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 4:55 PM, Swapnil Bawaskar <sb...@pivotal.io>
wrote:
> This is a great start, however, there may be features that only add options
> to gfsh commands rather than adding gfsh commands themselves, we should
> accommodate those as and when we encounter them.
>
> Udo, I like the idea of having a more generic solution for feature
> flagging, however, if a feature is only introducing public API, I don't see
> how we could hide it using an annotation.
>
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 4:46 PM Swapnil Bawaskar <sb...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
> > I like @Disabled too.
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 12:02 PM Michael William Dodge <
> mdodge@pivotal.io>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I kind of like @Disabled instead.
> >>
> >> Sarge
> >>
> >> > On 19 Mar, 2018, at 11:58, Udo Kohlmeyer <ud...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I wonder if this proposal could not be extended to the greater GEODE
> >> product. As this feature flagging is also relevant to other parts of the
> >> system and should maybe be consistently applied to all areas.
> >> >
> >> > Thoughts?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 3/19/18 11:46, Patrick Rhomberg wrote:
> >> >> Hello, All
> >> >>
> >> >> I am interested in extending annotation functionality on our gfsh
> >> >> commands, particularly with respect to feature-flagging commands that
> >> are
> >> >> mutually-reliant or not yet feature complete.
> >> >> Please review the proposal [1] at your convenience.
> >> >>
> >> >> Imagination is Change.
> >> >> ~Patrick Rhomberg
> >> >>
> >> >> [1]
> >> >>
> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/
> Proposal+for+Gfsh+Feature+Flag
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
>
Re: [Proposal] Gfsh Command Feature Flag Annotation
Posted by Swapnil Bawaskar <sb...@pivotal.io>.
This is a great start, however, there may be features that only add options
to gfsh commands rather than adding gfsh commands themselves, we should
accommodate those as and when we encounter them.
Udo, I like the idea of having a more generic solution for feature
flagging, however, if a feature is only introducing public API, I don't see
how we could hide it using an annotation.
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 4:46 PM Swapnil Bawaskar <sb...@pivotal.io>
wrote:
> I like @Disabled too.
>
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 12:02 PM Michael William Dodge <md...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
>> I kind of like @Disabled instead.
>>
>> Sarge
>>
>> > On 19 Mar, 2018, at 11:58, Udo Kohlmeyer <ud...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > I wonder if this proposal could not be extended to the greater GEODE
>> product. As this feature flagging is also relevant to other parts of the
>> system and should maybe be consistently applied to all areas.
>> >
>> > Thoughts?
>> >
>> >
>> > On 3/19/18 11:46, Patrick Rhomberg wrote:
>> >> Hello, All
>> >>
>> >> I am interested in extending annotation functionality on our gfsh
>> >> commands, particularly with respect to feature-flagging commands that
>> are
>> >> mutually-reliant or not yet feature complete.
>> >> Please review the proposal [1] at your convenience.
>> >>
>> >> Imagination is Change.
>> >> ~Patrick Rhomberg
>> >>
>> >> [1]
>> >>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Proposal+for+Gfsh+Feature+Flag
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
Re: [Proposal] Gfsh Command Feature Flag Annotation
Posted by Swapnil Bawaskar <sb...@pivotal.io>.
I like @Disabled too.
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 12:02 PM Michael William Dodge <md...@pivotal.io>
wrote:
> I kind of like @Disabled instead.
>
> Sarge
>
> > On 19 Mar, 2018, at 11:58, Udo Kohlmeyer <ud...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > I wonder if this proposal could not be extended to the greater GEODE
> product. As this feature flagging is also relevant to other parts of the
> system and should maybe be consistently applied to all areas.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> >
> > On 3/19/18 11:46, Patrick Rhomberg wrote:
> >> Hello, All
> >>
> >> I am interested in extending annotation functionality on our gfsh
> >> commands, particularly with respect to feature-flagging commands that
> are
> >> mutually-reliant or not yet feature complete.
> >> Please review the proposal [1] at your convenience.
> >>
> >> Imagination is Change.
> >> ~Patrick Rhomberg
> >>
> >> [1]
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Proposal+for+Gfsh+Feature+Flag
> >>
> >
>
>
Re: [Proposal] Gfsh Command Feature Flag Annotation
Posted by Michael William Dodge <md...@pivotal.io>.
I kind of like @Disabled instead.
Sarge
> On 19 Mar, 2018, at 11:58, Udo Kohlmeyer <ud...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I wonder if this proposal could not be extended to the greater GEODE product. As this feature flagging is also relevant to other parts of the system and should maybe be consistently applied to all areas.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> On 3/19/18 11:46, Patrick Rhomberg wrote:
>> Hello, All
>>
>> I am interested in extending annotation functionality on our gfsh
>> commands, particularly with respect to feature-flagging commands that are
>> mutually-reliant or not yet feature complete.
>> Please review the proposal [1] at your convenience.
>>
>> Imagination is Change.
>> ~Patrick Rhomberg
>>
>> [1]
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Proposal+for+Gfsh+Feature+Flag
>>
>
Re: [Proposal] Gfsh Command Feature Flag Annotation
Posted by Udo Kohlmeyer <ud...@apache.org>.
I wonder if this proposal could not be extended to the greater GEODE
product. As this feature flagging is also relevant to other parts of the
system and should maybe be consistently applied to all areas.
Thoughts?
On 3/19/18 11:46, Patrick Rhomberg wrote:
> Hello, All
>
> I am interested in extending annotation functionality on our gfsh
> commands, particularly with respect to feature-flagging commands that are
> mutually-reliant or not yet feature complete.
> Please review the proposal [1] at your convenience.
>
> Imagination is Change.
> ~Patrick Rhomberg
>
> [1]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Proposal+for+Gfsh+Feature+Flag
>