Fix fallouts from ContainerTemplate STI #81
Conversation
I was assuming the model used when defining these collections
is same model as the `parent` for which we are looking them up,
which is wrong given STI.
This fixes errors in manageiq-providers-openshift repo:
can't save: missing @inv_collections[[:custom_attributes_for, "ContainerTemplate", "labels"]]
can't save: missing @inv_collections[[:custom_attributes_for, "ManageIQ::Providers::Kubernetes::ContainerManager::ContainerTemplate", "labels"]]
following ManageIQ/manageiq-providers-openshift#28
and related PRs.
| @@ -418,7 +418,7 @@ def get_pods_graph(inv) | |||
|
|
|||
| # polymorphic, relation disambiguates parent | |||
| def get_container_conditions_graph(parent, hashes) | |||
| model_name = parent.inventory_collection.model_class.name | |||
| model_name = parent.inventory_collection.model_class.base_class.name | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we don't need base class here right? (since the classes use in collections are already basic)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You're right we shouldn't need it, but experimentally we do :-\ Without it, in ManageIQ/manageiq-providers-openshift#28 refresher specs,
I get weird Invalid single-table inheritance type: ManageIQ::Providers::Openshift::ContainerManager::ContainerTemplate is not a subclass of ManageIQ::Providers::ContainerManager::ContainerTemplate
This parent-sniffing magic is too fragile, I'm gonna replace it with something more explicit (plus give inventory collections unique .names for debugging). But for now let's get back to green.
…erTemplate Autoload didn't happen, const was silently resolving to ManageIQ::Providers::ContainerManager::ContainerTemplate, very confusing. We want to explicitly load everything anyway.
cben
changed the title
|
Checked commits cben/manageiq-providers-kubernetes@7419a05~...8baff02 with ruby 2.2.6, rubocop 0.47.1, and haml-lint 0.20.0 |
|
Added missing |
I assumed in this code the model used when defining these collections is same model as the
parentfor which we are looking them up, which is wrong given STI.This fixes errors in manageiq-providers-openshift repo:
following ManageIQ/manageiq-providers-openshift#28 and related PRs.
I'm still seeing other errors in openshift specs locally, but this gets us closer to green...
@lfu @moolitayer @Ladas please review.