[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       spacewalk-devel
Subject:    [Spacewalk-devel] satellite.certificate. namespace
From:       bperkins () redhat ! com (Brandon Perkins)
Date:       2008-11-19 3:45:32
Message-ID: 49238BDC.2080907 () redhat ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Justin Sherrill wrote:
> Jesus M. Rodriguez wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Justin Sherrill <jsherril at redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Jesus M. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I would've voted for satellite.certificate. namespace for this type of
> > > > thing. I'm not a big fan of getObjectAttribute type method names.
> > > > 
> > > > So instead of satellite.getCertificateExpirationDate() how about
> > > > satellite.certificate.getExpirationDate()?
> > > > 
> > > > http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spacewalk.git;a=commitdiff;h=98bb228cb5617bce0876796bc6f3f4bad917bc6f
> > > >  
> > > > jesus
> > > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Spacewalk-devel mailing list
> > > > Spacewalk-devel at redhat.com
> > > > https://www.redhat.co
> > > > 
> > > Would anything else go in 'satellite.certificate'?  Seems kinda silly to
> > > have a namespace just for one call.  The only other thing that I can
> > > think of that would go in that namespace would be entitlement
> > > information, and there are other ways to get that.
> > > 
> > > 
> > I assumed we were going down a path of adding apis about certificates,
> > so I figured we'd add a namespace.
> > Honestly I don't have a problem with having a namespace with a single
> > method, because if we were going to
> > add more, it's easier to have the namespace in now. But if this is a
> > single occurrence and we don't plan on
> > having other certificate type methods, I can live with it in satellite
> > namespace but I still prefer satellite.cert or satellite.certificate
> > > )
> > 
> > jesus
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Spacewalk-devel mailing list
> > Spacewalk-devel at redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
> > 
> Yeah, if we can think of stuff that will go into a
> 'satellite.certificate' namespace in the future, I'd be all for it.  I
> just can't think of anything worthwhile :/
> 
> Unless we can think of something, anything! that might go into it, I'm
> hesitant to make a new namespace.  It cluters up the the docs, and it's
> another class....
> 
> -Justin
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Spacewalk-devel mailing list
> Spacewalk-devel at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel

Its a stretch, but 'owner' and 'issued' are the only things
*potentially* useful.  All other data in the cert can be retrieved other
ways or is incredibly static.  Does anyone think we'll have many changes
for:

product
satellite-version
generation

I doubt it.  I do like 'owner' and 'issued' somewhat though.

Thanks.
Brandon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Red Hat - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFJI4vchwQhj8l1t/cRArgJAJ9Uvtnjyt+Akidv6WVlylBR1xcsXQCZAf1O
QkNE8fv9TLq0ysD+MLoJpPA=
=BiaS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]