-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add access modifier to VolumeVO
#9394
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #9394 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 15.81% 15.81% -0.01%
+ Complexity 12554 12553 -1
============================================
Files 5629 5629
Lines 492023 492023
Branches 62519 63929 +1410
============================================
- Hits 77813 77812 -1
Misses 405887 405887
- Partials 8323 8324 +1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
good code @FelipeM525, but is there a cause for this? I mean is there a plan to exploit this ? |
I have same questions |
Hello @DaanHoogland, Given the scope of Cloudstack and the number of people that work on this project, I believe it's important to emphasize keeping the code base clean by applying clean code principles and respecting the main concept of Java, which is OOP. Therefore, we should make sure classes have private access modifiers and that fields aren't accessed directly without getters so as to adhere to encapsulation. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
CLGTM
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
CLGTM
@blueorangutan package |
@JoaoJandre a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el7 ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 10397 |
@blueorangutan test |
@weizhouapache a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (centos7 mgmt + kvm-centos7) has been kicked to run smoke tests |
[SF] Trillian Build Failed (tid-10909) |
@weizhouapache could you run the test again? |
@blueorangutan test rocky8 kvm-rocky8 |
@weizhouapache a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (rocky8 mgmt + kvm-rocky8) has been kicked to run smoke tests |
[SF] Trillian test result (tid-11008)
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@blueorangutan package
@blueorangutan package |
@JoaoJandre a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 10673 |
@weizhouapache could you run tests? |
@blueorangutan LLtest |
@DaanHoogland a [LL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (centos7 mgmt + kvm-centos7) has been kicked to run smoke tests |
This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch. |
…ere a field was being accessed without a getter
2a376f3
to
67dbfe3
Compare
@blueorangutan package |
@DaanHoogland a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✖️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 11094 |
for the debian build I see
I don't think we still have a slf4j dependency as it was removed and logging was consolidated to be all log4j2??? |
maybe a intermittent failure @blueorangutan package |
@weizhouapache a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 11097 |
Description
The class
VolumeVO
lacks access modifiers in its fields. This PR aims to improve adherence to object-oriented programming by adding private access modifiers to all fields in the class mentioned above, along with their respective getters and setters. I've also added a getter to an occurrence inVolumeApiServiceImpl
where a field belonging toVolumeVO
was being accessed directly.Types of changes
Feature/Enhancement Scale
How Has This Been Tested?
I ran all the tests related to
VolumeVO
andVolumeApiServiceImpl
, checked all usages of both classes, and made sure nothing was broken.