Problem
While we have a classification of errors and warnings, it remains unclear when plugins actually should emit errors and warnings.
Constraints
Assumptions
- Users want a uniform behavior within Elektra, so plugins must behave uniformly.
Considered Alternatives
- freedom to plugin writers
- strict rules and conformance tests for plugins
Decision
Provide guidelines in the form as tutorials, covering:
- prefer errors to warnings
- that any not understood metadata (e.g. types), should lead to an error
- that wrong specifications, like
kdb meta-set /tests/ipaddr/ipv4 check/ipaddr ipv8 should be rejected
- if the value does not confirm exactly to the specified type, an error should be emitted (e.g. only
0 or 1 as boolean)
- anything else that is beyond the capabilities of a plugin (not implemented), should lead to an error
Violations against these guidelines can be reported as bug and then either:
- the bug gets fixed
- the plugin get a worse
infos/status but still get shipped with 1.0
- the plugin gets removed
Rationale
It is easier for developers if there are clear expectations on how a plugin should behave. And it is much easier for overall Elektra if there is more consistency.
Implications
- more checks&errors in storage plugins are needed
Related Decisions
Notes
1.9.1