Add Project descriptor 0.2 support #810
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
Signed-off-by: Sambhav Kothari <skothari44@bloomberg.net>
- convert v1 descriptor to v2 - removes extraneous nil fields
tylerphelan
force-pushed
the
project-descriptor-02-refactor
branch
from
b0ef987 to
f9a2571
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #810 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 71.24% 71.27% +0.03%
==========================================
Files 117 117
Lines 5421 5441 +20
==========================================
+ Hits 3862 3878 +16
- Misses 1191 1193 +2
- Partials 368 370 +2
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
sambhav
approved these changes
Aug 24, 2021
matthewmcnew
approved these changes
Aug 25, 2021
dumez-k
approved these changes
Aug 25, 2021
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This is built on top of the original PR: #805
This includes a rebase and some refactoring
@samj1912 I refactored the descriptor parsing logic a little to remove the concern of the extra fields.
The field and type naming is still up for discussion in my mind if we don't like them.