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

feat: allow specifying components when using edit-validation-sets #5059

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 11, 2024

Conversation

andrewphelpsj
Copy link
Member

@andrewphelpsj andrewphelpsj commented Sep 23, 2024

  • Have you followed the guidelines for contributing?
  • Have you signed the CLA?
  • Have you successfully run tox run -m lint?
  • Have you successfully run tox run -e test-py310? (supported versions: py39, py310, py311, py312)

Hello! This should enable using edit-validation-sets with components. Let me know if I'm missing any testing. I don't see any tests that specifically test the allowed format of validation sets, so I don't know if that is something that we need/want to be added.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 23, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 89.69%. Comparing base (654871d) to head (7dba20a).
Report is 612 commits behind head on main.

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (654871d) and HEAD (7dba20a). Click for more details.

HEAD has 1 upload less than BASE
Flag BASE (654871d) HEAD (7dba20a)
2 1
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5059      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   94.88%   89.69%   -5.19%     
==========================================
  Files         658      341     -317     
  Lines       55189    22607   -32582     
==========================================
- Hits        52364    20278   -32086     
+ Misses       2825     2329     -496     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Collaborator

@mr-cal mr-cal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the PR! I have one comment and one request for updating some tests.

Will you update the dictionaries in tests/legacy/unit/store/v2/test_validation_sets.py to include components?

Do you happen to know if the store side is ready for this? Testing your branch gives me a store error Issues encountered with validation set: Additional properties are not allowed ('components' was unexpected) at /snaps/0

snapcraft_legacy/storeapi/v2/validation_sets.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@andrewphelpsj
Copy link
Member Author

@mr-cal, for the store side, that is expected to be released this week. @suligap might have more specific details. We can hold off on merging this until that change reaches the store.

I’ll update those tests now.

@mr-cal
Copy link
Collaborator

mr-cal commented Sep 23, 2024

@mr-cal, for the store side, that is expected to be released this week. @suligap might have more specific details. We can hold off on merging this until that change reaches the store.

I’ll update those tests now.

Sounds good.

Once the PR lands, it will be available in the edge channel. It will be part of Snapcraft 8.5, which I'm planning to cut and release to stable in the second half of October. Is that timing OK for you?

@andrewphelpsj andrewphelpsj force-pushed the comps-in-validation-sets branch 2 times, most recently from 76e4f07 to 282df4f Compare September 23, 2024 20:44
@andrewphelpsj andrewphelpsj marked this pull request as ready for review September 23, 2024 20:44
@andrewphelpsj
Copy link
Member Author

I think that is around the right time. I'll talk with my team to confirm timelines.

Copy link
Collaborator

@mr-cal mr-cal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks! Once the store changes are completed and we verify it works, we can land this PR.

Copy link
Contributor

@cmatsuoka cmatsuoka left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good, just added a question about component revision validation.

@mr-cal mr-cal merged commit c905016 into canonical:main Oct 11, 2024
14 of 15 checks passed
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants