Skip to content
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

Reintroduce a pipeline type #185

Closed
StewartW opened this issue Nov 15, 2019 · 2 comments
Closed

Reintroduce a pipeline type #185

StewartW opened this issue Nov 15, 2019 · 2 comments
Milestone

Comments

@StewartW
Copy link
Contributor

StewartW commented Nov 15, 2019

Hey,
We've got a business requirement for having some pipelines that have drastically different shapes.
As such we've made some changes to adf-build/shared/cdk/cdk_stacks/main.py (and schema)

example_snippet.txt

In the example snippet, you can see that we have two skyscanner specific pipelines, these are currently situated in adf/shared/cdk/cdk_stacks/skyscanner_stacks.py.
(Ideally, the dream would be to install these as part of the requirements.txt)
I think a touch would be if, what we call, the adf_default pipeline was also situated outside of main.py and imported in.

I think it would be quite beneficial for other users as it means that any updates to the default pipeline won't require extensive merge conflicts, and gives it a certain flexibility that would probably be beneficial to most ?

Let me know what you think? This is something I'm happy to work together on if you think it needs refined.

Edit: I've got a branch with how I think this would look.

@bundyfx
Copy link
Contributor

bundyfx commented Nov 26, 2019

Thanks for opening the issue, I think there is something we can do further to make this more modularized for sure. Im going to have a think/discussion about this one a bit more and take your example into mind. Will update this shortly with some more thoughts but I think you are on the right train of thought here.

@StewartW StewartW mentioned this issue Jan 20, 2020
@sbkok sbkok added this to the v3.2.0 milestone Nov 9, 2021
@sbkok
Copy link
Collaborator

sbkok commented Jan 24, 2023

Thank you for your patience. I am happy to inform you that this issue has been resolved in our latest release v3.2.0 just now.
I'm hereby closing this issue. Please open a new issue if you are experiencing any issues with the latest release.

@sbkok sbkok closed this as completed Jan 24, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants