[Freeipa-devel] [PATCH 0335] Freeipa domain levels naming

[Martin Basti]

On 23.10.2015 13:53, Tomas Babej wrote:
>
> On 10/23/2015 01:51 PM, Martin Basti wrote:
>>
>> On 23.10.2015 13:49, Tomas Babej wrote:
>>> On 10/23/2015 12:49 PM, Martin Basti wrote:
>>>> On 23.10.2015 09:34, Martin Basti wrote:
>>>>> On 23.10.2015 09:31, Tomas Babej wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/22/2015 05:49 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>>>>>>> On 22/10/15 11:29, Martin Basti wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> in current master branch we have mixed usage of literals 0, 1 and
>>>>>>>> constants MIN_DOMAIN_LEVEL, MAX_DOMAIN_LEVEL, and it is quite mess.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I suggest to use names for domain levels:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> COMPAT_DOMAIN_LEVEL = 0
>>>>>>>> PROMOTION_DOMAIN_LEVEL = 1
>>>>>>>> UBER_NEW_FEATURE_DOMAIN_LEVEL = 2
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> MIN_DOMAIN_LEVEL = COMPAT_DOMAIN_LEVEL (=0)
>>>>>>>> MAX_DOMAIN_LEVEL = UBER_NEW_FEATURE_DOMAIN_LEVEL (=2)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Benefits:
>>>>>>>> * ability to grep it in code
>>>>>>> Call them DOMAIN_LEVEL_0 and DOMAIN_LEVEL_1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * better readability in code
>>>>>>> Sure, but random names are not appropriate imo
>>>>>> I'm with you guys on this, it's a good idea. Let's go with the
>>>>>> DOMAIN_LEVEL_X naming though, it will be probably easier to remember.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One thing to add to the discussion - MIN/MAX_DOMAIN_LEVEL denotes only
>>>>>> the minimal/maximal domain level supported by the given IPA server,
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> the minimal/maximal domain level ever shipped by FreeIPA project.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Currently, those two coincide, but in general they might be
>>>>>> different if
>>>>>> we ever raise the minimal level a decide to deprecate, say, domain
>>>>>> level
>>>>>> 0 or 1. It's a subtle but important difference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tomas
>>>>> Thank you all for your opinion,
>>>>>
>>>>> I will implement DOMAIN_LEVEL_X constants and send patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> Martin^2
>>>>>
>>>> Patch attached.
>>>> O hope, I did not miss anything hardcoded.
>>> I think we can safely hardcode domain levels as numbers in the error
>>> messages. Substituting {dl} for constants.DOMAIN_LEVEL_0 in the error
>>> message makes little sense to me, as the value of
>>> constants.DOMAIN_LEVEL_0 will not ever change.
>> However, with substituting is easier to find occurrences of domain
>> levels in comments and messages in case of refactoring.
> In case of refactoring of what? All the error messages containing
> reference to a domain level 0? :)
Exactly! :)