On (02/03/16 16:00), Pavel Reichl wrote:
On 03/02/2016 03:43 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>On (02/03/16 15:13), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>On 03/02/2016 03:07 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>On (02/03/16 15:02), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>>On 03/02/2016 02:59 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>>>On (02/03/16 13:45), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>>>>On 03/02/2016 01:10 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>>>>>On (02/03/16 13:02), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>>>>>>On 03/02/2016 12:53 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>>>>>>>On (02/03/16 12:48), Pavel Březina wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>On 03/01/2016 03:54 PM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>I added one more similar patch.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>sss_idmap_calculate_range can accept domain
SID or range identifier on
>>>>>>>>>>>its input. Previous parameter name was
misleading.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Ack to both. They can sure be squashed before
pushing but I don't care.
>>>>>>>>>I miss a link here.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Anyway I would like to see a Sumit opinin about
renaming variables.
>>>>>>>>>Because name of variables is one of hard things
problems in IT
>>>>>>>>>http://martinfowler.com/bliki/TwoHardThings.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Might we could do an all hands meeting,
>>>>>>>>because we really don't want to underestimate such
important change.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>If the patch is not important then it does not make a sense to
push it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>BTW You introduced one of bad argument names in the recent
>>>>>>>commit 8babbeee01e67893af4828ddfc922ecac0be4197
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Sure, I did that and now I see that it would be nice to use a
different name.
>>>>>>
>>>>>Sumit is fine with changes.
>>>>>Would you be so kind and could you send squased patch which
>>>>>we can push.
>>>>
>>>>If you insist on squashing the patches then please do it while pushing
it.
>>>>
>>>I would but could you help me with commit mesage?
>>>I'm sorry but for me it's the same problem as name of variables
>>>http://martinfowler.com/bliki/TwoHardThings.html
>>> "There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache
invalidation and
>>> naming things."
>>> Phil Karlto
>>>
>>>I would appreciate if autor of the patch could do it.
>>>
>>>LS
>>>
>>
>>Lukas can you just push the patches as they are?
>I would like but there is issue with separating changes to patches.
>
>In general it make sense to have small patches. And each patch
>should do one thing e.g. do not mix unrelated coding style with change of
>logic. However if TWO patches do the same it does not make a sense to separate
>them. In samba, they separate this if the change is in different part of code
>e.g. ldb, tdm, talloc, samba3 ... The reason is bacporting of such changes.
>But in our case the change is in one module.
>
>>Sumit and Pavel ACKed them independently and neither of them expressed
>>the desire of having them squashed.
>Neither of them expresed that it's the best idea ever to have changes in two
>patches.
>
>Please update patch and I will send a link to CI because neither of reviewers
>did it.
>/sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>
Squashed patch attached. Do you want Sumit and Pavel to review the patch again?
From 54e04f26494fa37b0caa10613e0455b0650ee0c8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
2001
From: Pavel Reichl <preichl(a)redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 08:41:24 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] IDMAP: Make parameter names more descriptive
Domain SID (not name) is part of identification string for helper range
in generate_sec_slice_name().
Use more generic name for range identifier when calculating range for
new slice in sss_idmap_calculate_range().
---
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/38/43/summary.html
master: bda0a8ee67c4222ede597fd57456b74e33116653
Thank you very much for patience.
LS