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

♻️ Address code duplication issues introduced in #860 #956

Closed
jsnel opened this issue Jan 16, 2022 · 3 comments
Closed

♻️ Address code duplication issues introduced in #860 #956

jsnel opened this issue Jan 16, 2022 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
Status: Lack of interest Issue went stale | cold | lack of (user) interest
Milestone

Comments

@jsnel
Copy link
Member

jsnel commented Jan 16, 2022

As also pointed out by SonarCloud in a detailed analysis this PR introduces some code duplication. We'll accept these for now, to not get in the way of the 'merge train' leading up to the introduction of the Projects feature (it could complicate rebase of subsequent PRs in the queue) but this issue will serve as a reminder to revisit this once the strain stops at the next station.

As @s-weigand puts it:
For the sake of getting on with the "merge train" I guess this is fine from my side.
Even so, I don't agree with the removing of DecayMegacomplexBase which added useless code duplication and cyclic import workarounds, just because of a disagreement about using abstract base classes

Originally posted by @s-weigand in #860 (review)

@jsnel jsnel changed the title Address code duplication issues introduce din #860 ♻️ Address code duplication issues introduced in #860 Jan 16, 2022
@s-weigand s-weigand added this to the v0.7.0 milestone May 17, 2022
@jsnel
Copy link
Member Author

jsnel commented Nov 6, 2022

To re-evaluate how much of an issues this still is, especially following changes in PR #1135 and the (expected) follow-up PR refining kinetic decay megacomplex.

@jsnel jsnel modified the milestones: v0.7.0, v0.8.0 Nov 6, 2022
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jun 19, 2023

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the Status: Lack of interest Issue went stale | cold | lack of (user) interest label Jun 19, 2023
Copy link

stale bot commented Dec 19, 2023

This issue has been closed due to lack of recent activity. Please open a new issue if you're still encountering this problem. Thanks for your contributions!

@stale stale bot closed this as completed Dec 19, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Status: Lack of interest Issue went stale | cold | lack of (user) interest
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants