-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 356
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Unify endpoint data for report data. #2195
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am a bit confused by mixing :association and :model name, those were 2 different things before?
E.g. model_name=ExtManagementSystem and association=:vms with parent_id=1, I would expect we do
ExtManagementSystem.find(1).vms, which list Vms under that ems where :vms model_name can be e.g Vm
We do that call, but we call is as identify_record(parent_id, controller_to_model).send(HAS_ASSOCATION[params[:model_name]]) ?
I think before we were just using :association directly, while having allowed list of associations for each controller. Now we kind of have allowed list of associations per :model_name globally, in HAS_ASSOCATION?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
e.g before if you had controller_name/1/?diplay=all_vms
it could map to this
https://github.com/Ladas/manageiq-ui-classic/blob/36c5a957b6fcad6a89d81bb8238c70ef04a55d1e/app/controllers/mixins/generic_show_mixin.rb#L151
or going to generic, which does https://github.com/Ladas/manageiq-ui-classic/blob/36c5a957b6fcad6a89d81bb8238c70ef04a55d1e/app/controllers/mixins/generic_show_mixin.rb#L139
while expecting to have list of allowed sub-tables per controller like this https://github.com/Ladas/manageiq-ui-classic/blob/35dbd795ba08c3778866245dfce91b4b5d88a76d/app/controllers/network_port_controller.rb#L18
of course the explorer views were more complex and weren't ported to this format :-(
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
so to sum what I try to say :-)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Naming is and was confusing. The methods on the get_view* code path have different names for the same thing on several places and it's not easy to fix.
Let's do small steps that improve the situation. We don't need to fix too much in a single PR.