core: Quota name in audit log when deleting quota

[smelamud]

Added missing method for ${QuotaName} substitution in the audit log
message for RemoveQuotaCommand.

Change-Id: I9826e1965b7faf8dc46afa80d1218ae49fc4a34b
Bug-Url: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2018412
Signed-off-by: Shmuel Melamud smelamud@redhat.com

[liranr23]

The changes seems fine and simple.
But, should AuditLog take it from the quota itself? getQuota.getName()? without this additional getQuotaName()?

[smelamud]

@liranr23 That's how these substitutions work. There is no way to use expressions there.

[ahadas]

yes, it is simple but wouldn't it make more sense to change RemoveQuotaCommand to extend QuotaCRUDCommand?

[smelamud]

yes, it is simple but wouldn't it make more sense to change RemoveQuotaCommand to extend QuotaCRUDCommand?

I don't see much sense in it. Besides get/setQuota() and getQuotaName() all other code is useless in this command.

[ahadas]

yes, it is simple but wouldn't it make more sense to change RemoveQuotaCommand to extend QuotaCRUDCommand?

I don't see much sense in it. Besides get/setQuota() and getQuotaName() all other code is useless in this command.

Not for reusability but to represent kind-of relationship, after all CRUD includes "delete".. :)

[smelamud]

Not for reusability but to represent kind-of relationship, after all CRUD includes "delete".. :)

Yeah, but there is another problem: QuotaCRUDCommand uses QuotaCRUDParameters that contain a lot of things, but RemoveQuotaCommand uses id only. Since the code of QuotaCRUDCommand relies heavily on the parameters, we will need to add another level of hierarchy between QuotaCRUDCommand and Add/UpdateQuotaCommand and move all this code there. This looks as an overkill for such a bug, honestly.

As an alternative, we can just rename QuotaCRUDCommand to something more correct ;)

[ahadas]

practically, that missing variable is probably the only gap we'll have but conceptually it's not different from RemoveAffinityGroupCommand that extends AffinityGroupCRUDCommand - the parameters of the latter contain more data than the former needs (as you wrote, "remove" only needs the ID)

so isn't it just about removing the NotNull for quota in QuotaCRUDParameters?

[smelamud]

@ahadas Won't removing @NotNull break some validation?

OK, let me try with QuotaCRUDCommand, will see how it works.

[ahadas]

@ahadas Won't removing @NotNull break some validation?

probably, I meant to do that and add a null-check where appropriate

OK, let me try with QuotaCRUDCommand, will see how it works.

ack

[smelamud]

OK, let me try with QuotaCRUDCommand, will see how it works.

ack

Done.

[ahadas]

/ost