Fix CI and fix specs for Java VSPK generation

[little-dude]

@martin-leclerc seems like the java generation is failing while the other are working. Do you mind taking a look?

[little-dude]

the vspk generator does have your changes from https://github.com/nuagenetworks/vspkgenerator/pull/6

[little-dude]

@martin-leclerc I made you a collaborator on my own fork so you can push in my branch to update this PR and re-trigger a build whenever you want. In the deploy.sh script, you can change the link to vspk-generator and make it point to your own fork to test your changes if needed.

[martin-leclerc]

Got the latest vsd-api-specifications (4.0 branch) monolithe (master), vspkgenerator (master), java-bambou (master) and vspk-java generated and compiled fine in my environment.

Martin.

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 3:33 PM, Corentin Henry notifications@github.com wrote:

the vspk generator does have your changes from nuagenetworks/vspkgenerator#6 https://github.com/nuagenetworks/vspkgenerator/pull/6

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/nuagenetworks/vsd-api-specifications/pull/10#issuecomment-244467961, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APGZ0sTvmmYGfLIg7ZsOBzwTfLX2FZUjks5qmHoGgaJpZM4Jz_dv .

[martin-leclerc]

The content of vspk-java (and other vspk-*) projects have not been refreshed/re-generated in 2 days according to GitHub.

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Martin Leclerc martin.f.leclerc@gmail.com wrote:

Got the latest vsd-api-specifications (4.0 branch) monolithe (master), vspkgenerator (master), java-bambou (master) and vspk-java generated and compiled fine in my environment.

Martin.

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 3:33 PM, Corentin Henry notifications@github.com wrote:

the vspk generator does have your changes from nuagenetworks/vspkgenerator#6 https://github.com/nuagenetworks/vspkgenerator/pull/6

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/nuagenetworks/vsd-api-specifications/pull/10#issuecomment-244467961, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APGZ0sTvmmYGfLIg7ZsOBzwTfLX2FZUjks5qmHoGgaJpZM4Jz_dv .

[pdellaert]

@little-dude just a personal remark: this is a public open-source community representing Nuage. (purely personal), i would try and keep the commit messages a bit more descriptive and clear...

[little-dude]

@pdellaert I'll rebase before merging of course, but this is work in progress.

@martin-leclerc 4.0R4 is based on the master branch, not the 4.0 one.

[martin-leclerc]

Based on my own testing (as described previously), no updates to vspkgenerator not to the vsd-api-specifications are necessary for the vspj-java to generate properly.

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Philippe Dellaert notifications@github.com wrote:

@little-dude https://github.com/little-dude just a personal remark: this is a public open-source community representing Nuage. (purely personal), i would try and keep the commit messages a bit more descriptive and clear...

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/nuagenetworks/vsd-api-specifications/pull/10#issuecomment-244469745, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APGZ0kSfXrt6M0O5-aCWP2_YcerbuSWvks5qmHvpgaJpZM4Jz_dv .

[pdellaert]

aha, ok :)

[little-dude]

Based on my own testing (as described previously)

yes but you're using the 4.0 branch of the vsd-api-specifications, instead of master. 4.0.R4 is based on master. We changed our branching model for 4.0R1.

[pdellaert]

Is that change in branching model also used for the auto-generation of the vspk-* repos? (didn't follow the full discussion previously, if i missed this point)

[martin-leclerc]

@little-dude Oh I see. I will checkout master then and check the results

[little-dude]

Is that change in branching model also used for the auto-generation of the vspk-* repos?

Yes. I was not aware of this myself, that's why I slightly messed up the release actually... I'm sorry for all the confusion.

[pdellaert]

No problem :), we just need to figure out a good final strategy on auto-generation and source management. If this works, and it's clean, than everybody is happy :D

[martin-leclerc]

I had to leave work before I could get to solving the code generation error. I will look at it the long weekend.

Martin.

From: Corentin Henry [mailto:notifications@github.com] Sent: September 2, 2016 3:50 PM To: nuagenetworks/vsd-api-specifications Cc: martin-leclerc; Mention Subject: Re: [nuagenetworks/vsd-api-specifications] tmp: refactor deployment (#10)

Is that change in branching model also used for the auto-generation of the vspk-* repos?

Yes. I was not aware of this myself, that's why I slightly messed up the release actually... I'm sorry for all the confusion.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/nuagenetworks/vsd-api-specifications/pull/10#issuecomment-244471701 , or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APGZ0hRfAxhQnQNueBXVMlPKSKlvggKsks5qmH3vgaJpZM4Jz_dv . https://github.com/notifications/beacon/APGZ0rrByKnmV9XhDXp_rgJ0fKh9_Mr_ks5qmH3vgaJpZM4Jz_dv.gif

[martin-leclerc]

@little-dude All the changes required to the latest 4.0 specification have been pushed to your branch (2 separate commits). I am not sure how to perform a Travis build so I will let you do this (I am on a Windows machine).

@little-dude Now that I am done with all the changes, would you be able to merge the content of your branch to https://github.com/nuagenetworks/vsd-api-specifications? Are you going to create a new branch for this new version of the 4.0 specification (e.g. 4.0_R4) or it will be in the master branch?

Thanks,

Martin.

[little-dude]

I am not sure how to perform a Travis build so I will let you do this

A new build is triggered everytime you push in the PR: https://travis-ci.org/nuagenetworks/vsd-api-specifications/builds/157639053

Now that I am done with all the changes, would you be able to merge [...]?

I need someone to review your changes to the specs because I don't know much about it.

Are you going to create a new branch for this new version of the 4.0 specification (e.g. 4.0_R4) or it will be in the master branch?

Well all these changes must be applied to master as well, so I'll probably just merge it in master and tag them with r4.0.4-1. Unless someone objects (cc @t00f ?).

[pdellaert]

From what i see in the spec changes, i don't suspect any issue. But to be save, have @t00f look at them as well :).

[martin-leclerc]

@little-dude any idea when this PR will be merged?

[natabal]

@martin-leclerc Why do you to have the package specified for each model? How is this important to you. I'm asking the question so I can ask my colleagues to specify it if this is of any use.

[martin-leclerc]

The package attribute in the VSD specification is used by the code generation module (Monolithe based) that is responsible for generating the Nuage vRO plug-in as well as its related workflows.

There are 4 different workflows generated per model entity: A create, an update, a delete and a find workflow.

The generated workflows are installed/stored in folders in the vRO environment. Instead of having all the generated workflows showing in a single folder (there are currently over 450 of them), they are rather stored in sub-folders, one sub-folder per package name/type (i.e. workflows are stored in their respective package sub-folders).

vRO = vRealize Orchestrator, a VMWare product.

[natabal]

I see! So it has nothing to do with our server code but mostly with how the generated code is organized. So you can ignore then the package comments I put in the review.

[martin-leclerc]

Well, if you happen to know which package each of the new entities actually belong to that would be really helpful (so what you started commented on is good). Once your review is done, I could then update the specification accordingly.

[natabal]

The review is done. Your changes can be merged. I will asked my colleagues to add from now on the package information as well when adding the specs.

[martin-leclerc]

@little-dude I will let you do the merge since you are the one who created this PR.

[natabal]

allalarms.spec needs to be removed then. Such an entity does not exist in VSD then.

[pdellaert]

It is however still used in the UI (see screenshot) and it is also in the API docs as a URL path that can be called (check the Alarm entity in the API docs)

So there has to be a way to have this still present as a callable UI to get the alarms on an enterprise (or the UI code will need fixing as well)

[little-dude]

@martin-leclerc @natabal I merged without the change in allalarm, since there is a doubt wether this is a valid change or not and i didn't want to block this PR for too long because of this. @martin-leclerc feel free to open another PR for this change though.

[martin-leclerc]

@little-dude @t00f Would it be possible to merge the changes made in this PR back to the 4.0 branch? vspk-vro plug-in will not compile without those changes.