metron-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Miklavcic <michael.miklav...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Parser Aggregation in Management UI
Date Tue, 07 May 2019 14:13:36 GMT
Ok, thanks for the clarification.

On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 5:49 AM Shane Ardell <shane.m.ardell@gmail.com>
wrote:

> NgRx was only used for the aggregation feature and doesn't go beyond that.
> I think the way I worded that sentence may have caused confusion. I just
> meant we use it to manage more pieces of state within the aggregation
> feature than just previous and current state of grouped parsers.
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 1:32 AM Michael Miklavcic <
> michael.miklavcic@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Shane, thanks for putting this together. The updates on the Jira are
> useful
> > as well.
> >
> > > (we used it for more than just that in this feature, but that was the
> > initial reasoning)
> > What are you using NgRx for in the submitted work that goes beyond the
> > aggregation feature?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 12:22 PM Shane Ardell <shane.m.ardell@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello everyone,
> > >
> > > In response to discussions in the 0.7.1 release thread, I wanted to
> > start a
> > > thread regarding the parser aggregation work for the Management UI. For
> > > anyone who has not already read and tested the PR locally, I've added a
> > > detailed description of what we did and why to the JIRA ticket here:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-1856
> > >
> > > I'm wondering what the community thinks about what we've built thus
> far.
> > Do
> > > you see anything missing that must be part of this new feature in the
> UI?
> > > Are there any strong objections to how we implemented it?
> > >
> > > I’m also looking to see if anyone has any thoughts on how we can
> possibly
> > > simplify this PR. Right now it's pretty big, and there are a lot of
> > commits
> > > to parse through, but I'm not sure how we could break this work out
> into
> > > separate, smaller PRs opened against master. We could try to
> cherry-pick
> > > the commits into smaller PRs and then merge them into a feature branch,
> > but
> > > I'm not sure if that's worth the effort since that will only reduce the
> > > number commits to review, not the lines changed.
> > >
> > > As an aside, I also want to give a little background into the
> > introduction
> > > of NgRx in this PR. To give a little background on why we chose to do
> > this,
> > > you can refer to the discussion thread here:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/06a59ea42e8d9a9dea5f90aab4011e44434555f8b7f3cf21297c7c87@%3Cdev.metron.apache.org%3E
> > >
> > > We previously discussed introducing a better way to manage application
> > > state in both UIs in that thread. It was decided that NgRx was a great
> > tool
> > > for many reasons, one of them being that we can piecemeal it into the
> > > application rather than doing a huge rewrite of all the application
> state
> > > at once. The contributors in this PR (myself included) decided this
> would
> > > be a perfect opportunity to introduce NgRx into the Management UI since
> > we
> > > need to manage the previous and current state with the grouping feature
> > so
> > > that users can undo the changes they've made (we used it for more than
> > just
> > > that in this feature, but that was the initial reasoning). In addition,
> > we
> > > greatly benefited from this when it came time to debug our work in the
> UI
> > > (the discussion in the above thread link goes a little more into the
> > > advantages of debugging with NgRx and DevTools). Removing NgRx from
> this
> > > work would reduce the numbers of lines changed slightly, but it would
> > still
> > > be a big PR and a lot of that code would just move to the component or
> > > service level in the Angular application.
> > >
> > > Shane
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message