-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54
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
🌱 Upgrade Deppy #560
🌱 Upgrade Deppy #560
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #560 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 83.93% 84.06% +0.13%
==========================================
Files 20 20
Lines 809 816 +7
==========================================
+ Hits 679 686 +7
Misses 90 90
Partials 40 40
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
5cdfb1b
to
5554ac6
Compare
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.
Overall looks good to me. One nit about potentially confusing naming of a field but I don't think that should block this PR
// OperatorReconciler reconciles a Operator object | ||
type OperatorReconciler struct { | ||
client.Client | ||
Scheme *runtime.Scheme | ||
Resolver *solver.DeppySolver | ||
CatalogClient BundleProvider |
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.
Nit: I can see confusion occurring with this naming pattern. If unaware of the context one might assume that this is a fully featured client for retrieving catalog information where in reality this only provides an interface for fetching bundles. I'd prefer a name that more clearly signals that this is used for fetching bundles specifically. Maybe something like BundleClient
?
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 renamed the field to be BundleProvider
to match BundleProvider
interface. But I kept catalog client names in the client itself (at least for now). The client already fetches all the data from catalogs - It is just that we only provide a method to get bundles. This might change at some point.
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.
The use of the name variables
in multiple places might be a bit confusing... I'd suggest using vars
in places where there's a function/method named variables
. Or possibly renaming the variables()
method. (Yes, golang is able to figure it out, but can we?)
I was about to approve (I'm ok w/the naming) but want to give @m1kola a chance to respond |
Re |
Good point. I think for operator-controller users everything should stay the same. Replaced with 🌱 |
New version contains breaking changes: Deppy no longer has variable source API. Instead it accepts a slice of variables as input. Signed-off-by: Mikalai Radchuk <[email protected]>
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.
/lgtm
Quay failed with 502. Will try to merge again. |
Description
New version contains breaking changes: Deppy no longer has variable source API. Instead it accepts a slice of variables as input.
Reviewer Checklist