[aeolus-incubator/tim] edd94e: Added inverse associations
by Martyn Taylor
Branch: refs/heads/model_validations
Home: https://github.com/aeolus-incubator/tim
Commit: edd94e15b7482cced1d9b6baed380a7c849b94dc
https://github.com/aeolus-incubator/tim/commit/edd94e15b7482cced1d9b6baed...
Author: Martyn Taylor <mtaylor(a)redhat.com>
Date: 2012-11-29 (Thu, 29 Nov 2012)
Changed paths:
M app/models/tim/base_image.rb
M app/models/tim/image_version.rb
M app/models/tim/provider_image.rb
M app/models/tim/target_image.rb
M app/models/tim/template.rb
Log Message:
-----------
Added inverse associations
Commit: 13b1c2bafb1155e2e82157a47e5380a7b865109d
https://github.com/aeolus-incubator/tim/commit/13b1c2bafb1155e2e82157a47e...
Author: Martyn Taylor <mtaylor(a)redhat.com>
Date: 2012-11-30 (Fri, 30 Nov 2012)
Changed paths:
M app/models/tim/base_image.rb
M app/models/tim/image_version.rb
M app/models/tim/provider_image.rb
M app/models/tim/target_image.rb
M spec/controllers/base_images_controller_spec.rb
M spec/controllers/image_versions_controller_spec.rb
M spec/controllers/provider_images_controller_spec.rb
M spec/controllers/target_images_controller_spec.rb
M spec/factories/tim/provider_image.rb
M spec/factories/tim/target_image.rb
M spec/models/base_image_spec.rb
M spec/models/dummy/pool_family_spec.rb
M spec/models/dummy/provider_account_spec.rb
M spec/models/dummy/provider_type_spec.rb
M spec/models/dummy/user_spec.rb
M spec/models/image_version_spec.rb
M spec/models/provider_image_spec.rb
M spec/models/target_image_spec.rb
M spec/models/template_spec.rb
M spec/views/base_images_spec.rb
Log Message:
-----------
Added Validation to Models
Commit: dcdb9382fe630575f617b098f1e90233619354a2
https://github.com/aeolus-incubator/tim/commit/dcdb9382fe630575f617b098f1...
Author: Martyn Taylor <mtaylor(a)redhat.com>
Date: 2012-11-30 (Fri, 30 Nov 2012)
Changed paths:
A app/patches/rails/active_record/autosave_association.rb
Log Message:
-----------
Fixed Rails Bug in Monkey Patch
Compare: https://github.com/aeolus-incubator/tim/compare/edd94e15b748^...dcdb9382fe63
11 years, 4 months
Rails 4.0 Talk?
by Martyn Taylor
Gentlemen,
It appears that Rails 4.0 is just around the corner. I wonder if any of
you guys have looked into any of the new features yet and would be
willing to give a talk to the rest of the team?
It will be worth while looking at what Rails 4.0 can offer us as early
as possible; as this may impact some of our decisions moving forward.
One feature in particular is the job scheduler API. Which would mean we
can get rid of delayed job. I'm also interested to hear about the new
AR changes and if the default REST API has been improved.
If we don't have any takers just yet, maybe we can schedule some time
for one person to do a bit of research and present to the group. I'd be
happy to do this post next sprint.
Thoughts?
Regards
Martyn
11 years, 4 months
Hub - git wrapper for better github experience
by Petr Blaho
Hi,
I just started using hub (https://github.com/defunkt/hub) and I am
delighted.
Hub is "just" a wrapper sitting above git and makes working with github
repos, pulls, etc more easier.
Need to checkout branch from pull request comes? Just type
"hub checkout <pull request url>" and hub makes all the hard work for
you.
You can even make pull requests from console (did not tried yet).
Hub can be aliased to git without worrying b/c "your normal git commands
will all work. hub merely adds some sugar".
Read more at the link above ^.
--
Petr Blaho, pblaho(a)redhat.com
Software Engineer, CloudForms
11 years, 4 months
Re: [katello-devel] Foreman integration and Elastic search
by Hugh O. Brock
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 09:01:39AM +0200, Ohad Levy wrote:
> On 11/26/2012 06:42 PM, Dmitri Dolguikh wrote:
> >http://guides.rubyonrails.org/engines.html. In short, rails engine is a
> >way to embed a slice of functionality into another rails application. If
> >I understood this correctly, foreman team has actually started looking
> >into this.
>
> We are looking into it from the other way around, as community
> managed plugins to add to foreman.
>
> Hopefully there is no issue with a nested rails engines.
>
> However, I'm not sure what is the difference between API and as a
> mountable app, that we share the same db? (hopefully there are no
> database table collisions).
>
> Another option, if needed, is to create a foreman plugin for
> katello, which knows in which scenarios ES needs to be updated, this
> would work nicely with our planned plugin system, and would allow
> the katello team to extend foreman when needed.
>
(cc-ing aeolus-devel)
For what it's worth, we are sort of doing both with at least one Aeolus
project right now. TIM (Template and Image Manager) is developed as a
Rails Engine, and we will integrate it with Conductor as such. This
means that yes, TIM's model objects will be available to Conductor model
and controller classes.
However, TIM also exposes a REST API, and clients are encouraged to use
that rather than go directly to the models; the API is guaranteed stable
while the models are not.
IIUC Rails Engines have a build-in mechanism for namespacing that should
prevent object name collisions, but I'm not an expert on the
subject. Martyn Taylor or Jay Guiditta can provide more details.
My initial thought, though, is that foreman-as-an-engine is a fantastic
idea and should be pursued.
Take care,
--Hugh
--
== Hugh Brock, hbrock(a)redhat.com ==
== Engineering Manager, Cloud BU ==
== Aeolus Project: Manage virtual infrastructure across clouds. ==
== http://aeolusproject.org ==
"I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m
not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant."
--Robert McCloskey
11 years, 4 months
[PATCH conductor 0/1] FYI only - Tim::BaseImages#show impl.
by Matt Wagner
Hi folks,
I've been working with Jan on getting Tim integrated with Conductor.
This patch gets the image detail page working, subject to some
limitations (to be addressed in subsequent patches) noted in the
commit message.
I'm not sure that this patch requires ordinary review. It is *NOT*
going against the master branch at this time (and thus *NOT* for
inclusion in the sprint just ended), just is against the tim-devel
branch of Conductor on GitHub. But wanted to send it out for
transparency purposes.
<small>This took a lot longer than I expected it to...</small>
-- Matt
11 years, 4 months
RFC: permissions for cost entry
by Martin Povolny
Hi.
I wonder if when assigning costs to hardware profiles and hardware profile
properties, I should use the same privilege as would be used when
editing the hardware profile.
That is:
require_privilege(Privilege::MODIFY, @hardware_profile)
My thinking goes:
I don't want a separate path in the UI for assigning costs, as it would
be even more confusing then now. So in the place where you can find the
UI to edit frontend hardware profile I put the cost assignment for
backend profile.
Given it's in almost the same place and from user's point of view it
deals with the hardware profile, then it would be logical to use the
same privilege.
Thoughts?
--
Martin Povolny <mpovolny(a)redhat.com>
tel. +420777714458
11 years, 4 months
[RELEASE] branching and tagging the components
by Giulio Fidente
hi there,
I'm trying to figure out how the branches/tags applied to the components
on github match a release.
I tried to figure out it myself but I'm need of some help and I thought
that discussing this on the list was good idea.
My purpose is to find out which branch/tag one should checkout to make
sure that all the required components will work well together.
Here (which I think is outdated):
https://redmine.aeolusproject.org/redmine/projects/aeolus/wiki/Developmen...
we suggest to check out the components from master but that can't be a
fixed release in time.
Literature suggests to tag all the components with the same tag to mark
a release but to do this once (and move forward from that point), we
firstly need to find out how the existing tags match to each other, and
this is my question indeed.
If I wanted to checkout today the sources for some 'stable' release,
what should I do?
Also, do you see the idea of tagging all the components with the same
tag a valid approach or are there different suggestions?
--
Giulio Fidente
11 years, 4 months
End of Sprint Code Freeze Tues 27-Nov-2012
by steve linabery
Dear Aeolus developer community,
Please submit pull requests for features for the current sprint by COB on Tuesday.
Goal is to hand off to QE for testing the following day.
As you are undoubtedly aware, we are on an accelerated schedule before the end of the year; please also be sure to allow your reviewer (you did coerce someone into reviewing your pull request, right?) time to do their work.
Thanks!
Steve Linabery (eggs|eggmaster)
11 years, 4 months
