jcronenberg / agama / 7247180737

63%

Build Type

push

github

Committed by web-flow

Commit Message

Changing the network model (#924)

## Problem

Agama's network model is heavily inspired by
[nmstate](https://github.com/nmstate/nmstate/blob/c9fd1e80d/rust/src/lib/ifaces/ethernet.rs#L64).
Connections are represented [by an
enum](https://github.com/openSUSE/agama/blob/<a class=hub.com/jcronenberg/agama/commit/<a class="double-link" href="https://git"><a class=hub.com/jcronenberg/agama/commit/2bc452b39e4460122ab52c5a72ee0d1dfe154cec">2bc452b39/rust/agama-dbus-server/src/network/model.rs#L220)
and each variant contains a struct which depends on the type (e.g., the
[WirelessConnection](https://github.com/openSUSE/agama/blob/2bc452b39e4460122ab52c5a72ee0d1dfe154cec/rust/agama-dbus-server/src/network/model.rs#L542)
struct). Those structs have a `base` field that points to a
[BaseConnection
struct](https://github.com/openSUSE/agama/blob/master/rust/agama-dbus-server/src/network/model.rs#L328)
which holds the common fields for all connection types.

And that's perfectly fine. However, we decided to introduce some methods
to hide the fact that the common information lives in a separate
`struct`. We could say it is for encapsulation reasons, but I don't know
whether it is a good idea. Even we created some *getters* and *setters*
for those fields, adding quite some
[boilerplate](https://github.com/openSUSE/agama/blob/master/rust/agama-dbus-server/src/network/model.rs#L264-L299)
[code](https://github.com/openSUSE/agama/blob/master/rust/agama-dbus-server/src/network/model.rs#L318-L324)

Additionally, until we introduced the `ConnectionBuilder` (in #885),
creating a new connection with some custom data (like an id and a UUID)
was not straightforward because you needed to make the `BaseConnection`
first (see [this
example](https://github.com/openSUSE/agama/blob/2bc452b39e4460122ab52c5a72ee0d1dfe154cec/rust/agama-dbus-server/src/network/model.rs#L136-L141).

## Proposal

Although I am not 100% sure whether it is a better idea, I am exploring
the possibility of using a simpler layout to represent a connection. In
this case, we would use a ... (continued)

Run Details

1386 of 2129 branches covered (0.0%)

Branch coverage included in aggregate %.

100 of 130 new or added lines in 9 files covered. (76.92%)

110 existing lines in 4 files now uncovered.

15902 of 21024 relevant lines covered (75.64%)

21.02 hits per line