3:03 p.m.
Please review the patch which addresses the review comments given by Ade
and Fraser for patches 92-2, 93, 94.
92-2 has been checked in already. 94 has been rebased to fix conflicts
with Ade's checkins. I removed the changes to account.py and client.py
form 94 to fix the conflicts.
So update the master and apply patches 93, 94, 95.
Following are the review comments addressed in this patch -
** No. 4 in the list is not included in this patch. It will be done in a
separate patch.
1) Copy pasta error in ProfileData.from_json; ``policy_sets`` used
instead of ``inputs``/``outputs`` when processing
json_value['Input'] or json_value['Output'] lists.
2) Could you please make ProfileDataInfoCollection an iterable? It
doesn't make sense to be to have to access the ``profile_data_list``
attribute just to iterate the ProfileDataInfo objects.
3) Could you please add a ``repr`` method to ProfileData that
includes at least the profile_id? Maybe summary information about
whether it is visible/active as well, but I think just the ID should
be fine. Same goes for other classes that show up in lists, please.
4) I'm a little concerned about having the properties set/get
top-level attributes, e.g. ``enabled_by`` sets/gets ``enabledBy``.
Following this pattern where you wish to use the same name as in the
JSON would result in infinite loop; indeed you do treat some keys
different to avoid this, e.g. ``description``. This inconsistency
makes me wonder if there's a better pattern.
My suggestion would be to stash the JSON dict in a top-level
attribute (the constructor would have to initialise it to an empty
dict before other attributes are assigned) and then have the
properties set/get items in that dict.
You could further cut down boilerplate and duplication by definite a
descriptor for this purpose, e.g.:
class JSONProperty(object):
def __init__(self, attr):
self.attr
def __get__(self, instance, owner)
return obj.json_value[self.attr]
def __set__(self, instance, value)
obj.json_value[self.attr] = value
Then, most of the assignments in ``from_json`` go away , and
the corresponding property declarations follow the new pattern:
enabled_by = JSONProperty('enabledBy')
You would still need to treat Input, Output and PolicySets
differently, but you could also abstract over this pattern with yet
another class, i.e. a "JSON list property".
Anyhow, 4) isn't a show-stopper, just a (lengthy) nit-pick.
*** Will fix this in a separate patch.
5. Here you could iterate the (key, value) pairs to save keystrokes and
a bit of CPU doing ``cert_search_params[param]`` in all those places
below. e.g.:
for param, value in cert_search_params.viewitems():
...
``dict.viewitems()`` returns a *dictview* iterator-like object that
avoids creating an intermediate list as ``dict.items()`` would.
6. Here and in a few other places below it might improve readability to
test for set membership, e.g.:
if param in {
'email', 'common_name', 'user'_id',
'org_unit',
'org', ...
}:
7. pycharm appears to be set to 120 columns width by default. We need
to set to 80 and reformat accordingly. Please check in a pycharm
settings file. All new code should follow PEP8.
8. In CertRevokeRequest, a number of constants are defined for possible
reason settings. You should group those, and test for invalid reasons.
9. Do we use CertID anywhere? --- Removed CertID
10. list_entrollment_templates has a print r statement in it. Is that
supposed to be there?
11. get_enrollment_template should check for None for the profileID.
12. CertRequestInfoCollection has an element - cert_info_list, should
be
cert_request_info_list
13. ProfileConstraint -- why is id renamed to name? Why not just use
"id"
-- pycharm and pylint throw a warning when using id as an attribute name
-- Abhishek