Consolidate API version policy options #19489
Merged
Conversation
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
chlowell
requested review from
RickWinter,
jhendrixMSFT and
richardpark-msft
as code owners
JeffreyRichter
approved these changes
Nov 3, 2022
jhendrixMSFT
reviewed
Nov 3, 2022
jhendrixMSFT
approved these changes
Nov 3, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Following from Joel's comment that it's awkward for
PipelineOptionsto have two fields forAPIVersionPolicyoptions, and what if we later want to add a third, this PR consolidates them in a new type. The result is easier to extend but still awkward because although it seems best for the policy constructor to take this new type, its values are logically required. That is to say, it doesn't make sense to constructAPIVersionPolicywithout telling it where on to set the version on requests. Functionally speaking though, these values are optional because the policy is a no-op when they aren't set. (That's a workaround forNewPipeline()being unable to return an error.) So, please look it over and share your thoughts--maybe there's a tidier third way here.