Open Stack

I created a patch based off what Richard used as an example to highlight
inconsistencies and made it consistent.

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/264942/

Have a look and if it feels fine, we can start changing what else exists on
similar lines.
Suggestions welcome.

-Rajat

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:14 AM Thai Q Tran <tqtran at us.ibm.com> wrote:

> I 2nd that, should rename the file to delete.service.js to match service
> name.
>
>
> ----- Original message -----
> From: Rajat Vig <rajatv at thoughtworks.com>
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
> openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon] naming of Javascript bits
> Date: Thu, Jan 7, 2016 12:03 AM
>
> Richard
>
> My preference is the same as what you've got there.
> Fully namespaced Services and Controller allow for better reusability and
> possibly maintainability.
> If all "deleteService" were named just that, it'll be mighty confusing to
> use it in other places.
>
> With regards to tying the folder path and the Service/Controller I'd
> mostly go with that as that encourages simpler rules on how to namespace.
>
> For the particular patch you mentioned, the namespaces had a bit of churn
> which is sort of reflected in what exists in the patch now.
>
> If we decide a convention, then we can go and change the bits when the
> files change next.
>
> -Rajat
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:30 PM Richard Jones <r1chardj0n3s at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Horizon folks,
>
> We've been pretty good about namespacing the new angular code (to the
> extreme of having a bunch of very similar module files littered around, but
> that's angular/JS for you, so I'm not going to go on about it <wink>).
>
> Anyhoo. One thing I've noticed is that the services, factories and
> controllers inside those modules aren't being consistently named. We have
> got a mix of:
>
> Launch Instance:
>
>   .module('horizon.dashboard.project.workflow.launch-instance')
>   .factory('launchInstanceModel', launchInstanceModel);
>
> The new Images panel:
>
>   .module('horizon.app.core.images')
>   .factory('horizon.app.core.images.row-actions.service', rowActions);
>
> and in the same patch:
>
>   .module('horizon.app.core.images')
>   .factory('horizon.app.core.images.actions.deleteService', deleteService);
>
> I actually prefer the second form because it matches the filename
> ("row-actions.service.js") even though the module namespace doesn't match
> the file path ("/static/app/core/images/table/").
>
> Your thoughts?
>
>
>      Richard
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160107/1b51f071/attachment.html>