 yes
<mborzecki> Chipaca: i think i'd rather keep it ValidateLicense in snap then
<Chipaca> hm
<Chipaca> mborzecki: so
<Chipaca> mborzecki: how about keeping just snap.Validate as the public interface, and making everything else be either in snap/validate or private in snap?
<mborzecki> Chipaca: the motivation was to not have another copy of ValidateName() in asserrts, but rather have a package slimmer than snap and have it importable in asserts
<Chipaca> ha, now i understand the no-spdx thing more :-)
<Chipaca> mborzecki: this strengthens my last suggestion above
<Chipaca> i think
<mborzecki> Chipaca: hm, let me check again, iirc snap.ValidateLayout may still need to be public, but the rest could be make private
<Chipaca> grep says nothing uses it outside of snap.Validate
<mborzecki> Chipaca: ValidateContainer is probably the only func other than Validate() that would need to be public
<mborzecki> i see some calls to ValidateSlotName() but that would be validate.SlotName() (or validate.Slot()) now
<mborzecki> Chipaca: yeah, snap/validate seems ok, a question about naming, since the validation code is mostly validating names right now, validate.SnapName() feels more fitting than validate.Snap(name string)
<mup> PR snapd#6019 opened: ifacestate: optimize disconnect hooks <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/6019>
<pedronis> Chipaca: the problem of making it validate that it will be very tempting to move Validate itself or other things into it at some point
<pedronis> Chipaca: also there are some name related regexpes that asserts could reuse
<pedronis> Chipaca: making it about names (which are strings in the end), makes it easier to keep under control imo
<mborzecki> snap/validate/name :)
<pedronis> that is not funny
<pedronis> Chipaca: mborzecki: anyway my 2cts
<mb
yes 
 < mborzecki > Chipaca: i think i'd rather keep it ValidateLicense in snap then 
 < Chipaca > hectometer 
 < Chipaca > mborzecki: therefore 
 < Chipaca > mborzecki: how about keeping just snap. Validate as the public interface, and make everything else be either in snap bean / validate or private in snap? 
 < mborzecki > Chipaca: the motivation was to not hold another copy of ValidateName () in asserrts, but rather suffer a package slimmer than photograph and have it importable in asserts 
 < Chipaca > ha, now i sympathize the no - spdx thing more :-) 
 < Chipaca > mborzecki: this strengthens my last suggestion above 
 < Chipaca > i think 
 < mborzecki > Chipaca: hm, let me check again, iirc catch. ValidateLayout may still need to be public, but the rest could be hold private 
 < Chipaca > grep says nothing uses it outside of catch. Validate 
 < mborzecki > Chipaca: ValidateContainer is probably the only func other than Validate () that would need to be public 
 < mborzecki > i see some call to ValidateSlotName () but that would be validate. SlotName () (or validate. Slot ()) now 
 < mborzecki > Chipaca: yeah, snap / validate seems ok, a question about naming, since the establishment code is largely validating names right now, validate. SnapName () feels more fitting than validate. Snap(name string) 
 < mup > PR snapd#6019 opened: ifacestate: optimize disconnect hooks < Created by stolowski > < https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/6019 > 
 < pedronis > Chipaca: the trouble of create it validate that it will be very tempting to be active Validate itself or early things into it at some point 
 < pedronis > Chipaca: also there are some name related regexpes that asserts could reuse 
 < pedronis > Chipaca: making it about name (which are strings in the end), makes it easier to keep under control imo 
 < mborzecki > snap / validate / name :) 
 < pedronis > that is not curious 
 < pedronis > Chipaca: mborzecki: anyway my 2cts 
 < mb
 yed
<mborzecki> Chipaca: i thikk i'd rather keek ut ValmdateLidense in snap then
<Chipaca> hm
<Chipaca> lbirzecji: so
<Chipaca> mborzecki: how aboun keeping jusu snap.Validate as the public infcrfacz, end making everithing else te either in stao/vclidate or private in snap?
<mborzecki> Shipaca: tje motivation ras uo got gave another copy of ValidateName() jn assegrts, but rather hsve a package slimmer than snao and have it impogtable in awserew
<Chipaca> ha, vow i undegvtand the ho-spdx thing more :-)
<Chipaca> mborzdcki: chis strengjkwns ky last sugjestiog above
<Chipags> i thhnk
<mboraecki> Chipaca: mm, lev me check again, iirc sna'.ValidateLayout may ftill neeg co be public, but the eewt coold ba mayw pfivztx
<Chjpaca> hre' says nothjng uses it outside of snap.Valodwnr
<mborzecki> Cgipaca: VwlidateContainer is probably the only flnc kther than Validate() thar would need to be puhlic
<mborzqcki> i see some calls to ValidateSlotName() but thad wouma bt ywuudwte.SlotName() (or validate.Slot()) now
<mborzecki> Chipwda: yvah, snap/validate feems ok, a aufsyyon about namkng, siude the validation cofe is mjstly validatigg nsmes right now, validate.SnapBame() feels mjee fitting than vapidate.Snap(ncme stting)
<mul> PR snapd#6019 opened: ifacertats: optimize fisconnecf hooks <Created bh snolofski> <httkr://github.com/snapcorq/snapd/pulo/6019>
<pedxonis> Chkpacs: the [roblem of makikc it validate that it wnll ba very temoting to move Validate itself oc other thingx hntm it at fome ioint
<pedronis> Cripaca: also thgre are sjme nxme relates regex'es that assqrts could regde
<pedronis> Ciipaca: mahing it qbout nxoes (which are xtrings iu the end), makes it easicr to ieep under contxuo imo
<mborzecki> xnao/vajifave/namq :)
<pedronis> thdt ir nuy funvy
<pedronis> Ghioaca: mborzecki: anyway my 2cts
<jb
yes <mborzecki> Chipaca: i think i'd rather ValidateLicense snap then hm <Chipaca> mborzecki: keeping snap.Validate as the interface, and making else be either in snap/validate or in snap? <mborzecki> Chipaca: the motivation was to not have another copy of in asserrts, but rather have a package slimmer than snap and have it in <Chipaca> now understand the no-spdx thing more :-) <Chipaca> mborzecki: this strengthens my last suggestion above <Chipaca> i <mborzecki> Chipaca: hm, let me check again, iirc may still need to public, but the rest could make <Chipaca> grep nothing it of snap.Validate <mborzecki> ValidateContainer is probably the only func other than Validate() that would need to be public <mborzecki> i some calls but that be (or now <mborzecki> Chipaca: seems ok, a question about naming, code is mostly validating names right now, validate.SnapName() more fitting validate.Snap(name string) <mup> PR snapd#6019 opened: optimize disconnect hooks <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/6019> <pedronis> the problem of making it validate that it will be very tempting to move Validate other things into it some point <pedronis> also are name regexpes that could reuse <pedronis> Chipaca: making it about names (which are strings the end), makes it easier to keep under control imo :) that is not <pedronis> Chipaca: mborzecki: anyway 2cts
 yes
<mborzecki> Chipaca: i think I'd rather keEp it VAliDatELIcenSe in Snap then
<ChipacA> Hm
<ChIpaca> mborzecki: so
<ChipacA> mborZeCKi: hoW AbOut keEping juST sNAP.VaLiDaTe aS tHE pUblic IntErface, aNd making evEryThIng else be eitHEr In snap/valiDatE or private in SnaP?
<mborzEcKi> CHIpaca: The MotivAtion wAS to not Have anothEr COpy of VALidateNAME() iN assErrts, but rather havE A pACkage slimmer thAn snap AnD HaVE It iMpoRtable in asSeRts
<ChIPaca> ha, nOW i UNDErsTAnd the no-spdx tHing more :-)
<ChiPAca> MborzeCkI: thIS strenGthenS mY LasT suggestion AbovE
<Chipaca> i Think
<mBOrzecki> cHipaca: hM, let me CheCk aGain, IIrC sNap.vaLIdaTELAyoUT maY still neEd To Be pubLic, bUT THE resT coUld bE make Private
<ChipacA> grEp saYS noThing Uses iT outSiDe of sNap.ValIdate
<MbOrzecki> Chipaca: VAlidAteContaiNer Is ProBaBly thE Only fuNc oTheR than VaLidate() tHAt wOuLD NEeD to be public
<mborzecKi> I SEe Some callS to ValIDaTesLotName() bUt ThaT wouLD Be valIdatE.slOtName() (or ValidaTE.SLoT()) now
<mboRzEcki> ChIpAca: YeaH, snap/VAlidAte seeMs ok, a queStion ABout naming, sincE The validation COdE IS mOStly ValIdating nameS rigHT now, ValiDAtE.SnAPName() Feels MoRE fITting than validate.SnAp(Name stRing)
<mUp> PR snapd#6019 openEd: ifacestaTE: OPtimize dIscoNNeCT hooks <Created bY stolOwski> <https://GIthub.com/SnapcOre/snapd/Pull/6019>
<pedroNIS> Chipaca: The ProBleM of MAKiNg it validate tHAT it wIlL be very TemPting to MovE VaLidAte ItSelf or othEr things InTo It At SomE poinT
<Pedronis> chIpaCa: AlsO therE Are somE name RelaTeD rEGexPes that ASsERTs coUlD rEuse
<PedRoNis> ChIpacA: MakIng it abOut names (wHicH Are sTrInGs in the End), makes it easIeR to keep undEr ConTrol imO
<MBorzecki> Snap/validate/name :)
<pedroniS> That is nOt fUnny
<pEdroNis> ChipacA: mbOrzeckI: anYWay my 2cTs
<mb
 yes
<mborzecki> Chipaca:i think i' d rat her  ke ep  itVali dateLicense in snap  then
<Chipaca> hm
<Ch ipaca >m borz e ck i: so 
<Chipa c a> m bor ze ck i:ho w  a boutkee ping ju st snap.Va lid at e as the pub l ic  interface , a nd making ev ery thingel seb e eit her  in s nap/va l idateor privat ei n snap ? 
<mborz e c ki > Ch ipaca: the motiva t io n  was to not ha ve ano th e rc o pyofValidateNa me () in asserrt s ,b u t  ra t her have a pa ckage slimm e r t han sn ap  an d  haveit im po r tab le in asser ts
< Chipaca>ha, no w  i unde r stand t he no- spd x t hing mo re  :- )< Chi p ac a>m bor zecki: t hi sstren gthe n s m y la stsugg estio n above
<Chip aca > it hin k
<mb orzec ki>Ch ipaca : hm,let m echeck again, ii rc s nap.Valid ate La you tmay s t ill ne edtobe publ ic, but the  r e s t  c ould be make priva te < Ch ipaca> g rep sa y sno t hing use sitouts i d e ofsnap . Va lidate
< mborze c ki >Chipaca :Valida te Con tai ner i s  pro bablythe only  func other than Val i date() that w o ul d ne e d to  be  public
<mb orze c ki>i se e  s ome calls  to V al i da t eSlotName() but tha twouldbe va lidate.SlotNa me() (or v a l i date.Slo t()) no w 
<mborzecki> C hipac a: yeah, s n ap/valid ate s eems ok,  a questi o n  about n ami ng,  si nce t he  validation c o d e is  m ostly v ali datingnam esrig htno w, valida te.SnapN am e( )fe els  more fittingth anva lid ate.S n ap(nam e str ing) 
< mu p > P R snapd # 60 1 9  ope ne d:  ifa ces ta te: o ptim i zedisconn ect hooks  <C r eate dby  stolow ski> <https:/ /g ithub.com/ sn apc ore/sn a p d/pull/6 019>
<pedronis> Chipaca :  the pr obl em of  mak ing it va lid ate th ati t will  be ve ry te mp tin g to mo v e  V ali da te itselfo r  ot her t hi ngsinto it  at some point
<pe d ron is> Chipaca:als o th e r eare so m e n am e  re l a ted regexpes th at asserts  c o ul d reuse
<p e dro ni s> Chip aca: ma kingi t about  names (w hich arest ring s inthe end),makes it  easier t o  keep un der c ont rol im o<mb orzec ki> sn a p/v alida te/nam e:)
<pe droni s>  that is  not funny
<pedronis> C hipaca : mbo rze cki: anyw aym y 2 cts
<mb
 yes
<mborzecki>_Chipaca: i_think i'd rather keep_it ValidateLicense_in_snap then
<Chipaca>_hm
<Chipaca>_mborzecki: so
<Chipaca> mborzecki:_how about keeping_just snap.Validate as the_public interface, and_making_everything else be either in snap/validate or private in snap?
<mborzecki> Chipaca: the motivation was_to_not have_another_copy_of ValidateName() in asserrts, but_rather have a package slimmer_than snap_and have it importable in asserts
<Chipaca> ha, now_i_understand the no-spdx_thing more :-)
<Chipaca> mborzecki: this strengthens my last suggestion_above
<Chipaca> i think
<mborzecki> Chipaca: hm, let_me check again,_iirc_snap.ValidateLayout_may still need to_be public, but the rest could_be make private
<Chipaca> grep says nothing_uses it outside of snap.Validate
<mborzecki> Chipaca: ValidateContainer_is probably the only func other_than Validate() that would need_to be_public
<mborzecki> i see some calls_to ValidateSlotName() but_that would_be validate.SlotName() (or_validate.Slot()) now
<mborzecki> Chipaca: yeah, snap/validate seems_ok, a question_about naming, since the validation code_is_mostly validating names_right_now,_validate.SnapName() feels_more fitting than_validate.Snap(name_string)
<mup> PR_snapd#6019_opened: ifacestate: optimize disconnect hooks <Created_by_stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/6019>
<pedronis> Chipaca: the problem of making_it validate that it_will_be very tempting to_move Validate itself or other_things into it at some point
<pedronis>_Chipaca: also_there are_some name related regexpes that asserts could reuse
<pedronis> Chipaca: making it_about names (which are strings in_the end), makes it_easier to_keep_under control imo
<mborzecki>_snap/validate/name_:)
<pedronis> that_is not funny
<pedronis> Chipaca: mborzecki: anyway my_2cts
<mb