metron-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nick Allen <n...@nickallen.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Parser Aggregation in Management UI
Date Mon, 06 May 2019 14:18:41 GMT
Have you considered creating a feature branch for the effort? This would
allow you to break the effort into chunks, where the result of each PR may
not be a fully working "master-ready" result.

I am sure you guys tackled the work in chunks when developing it, so
consider just replaying those chunks onto the feature branch as separate
PRs.



On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 5:24 AM Tibor Meller <tibor.meller@gmail.com> wrote:

> I wondered on the weekend how we could split that PR to smaller chunks.
> That PR is a result of almost 2 months of development and I don't see how
> to split that to multiple WORKING parts. It is as it is a whole working
> feature. If we split it by packages or files we could provide smaller
> non-functional PR's, but can end up having a broken Management UI after
> having the 1st PR part merged into master. I don't think that would be
> acceptable by the community (or even by me) so I would like to suggest two
> other option to help review PR#1360.
>
> #1 We could extend that PR with our own author comments in Github. That
> would help following which code part belongs to where and why it was
> necessary.
> #2 We can schedule an interactive code walkthrough call with the ones who
> interested in reviewing or the particular changeset.
>
> Please share your thoughts on this! Which version would support you the
> best? Or if you have any other idea let us know.
>
> PS: I think the size of our PR's depends on how small independently
> deliverable changesets we can identify before we starting to implement a
> relatively big new feature. Unfortunately, we missed to do that with this
> feature.
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 1:49 PM 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