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

Storage: support 'sourceGeneration' in 'copy_blob' #4546

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Dec 21, 2017

Conversation

davidebelloni
Copy link
Contributor

@davidebelloni davidebelloni commented Dec 7, 2017

Closes #4533.

@googlebot googlebot added the cla: yes This human has signed the Contributor License Agreement. label Dec 7, 2017
@chemelnucfin
Copy link
Contributor

Hello! Thank you for your contribution. Tests are also needed when you change source code.

Also, I thought about this problem. If source_generation was to be put into copy_blob, would other params also go into copy_blob? Also, the other functions such as delete_blob, etc. might need an update as well.

I will also continue to think about the problem, but feel free to finish this PR by adding tests.

Any additional comments @dhermes @tseaver ?

@chemelnucfin
Copy link
Contributor

I also just noticed that you made the PR using the master branch. A suggestion of using git is to make PRs on a separate branch, so that you can continue to do work and not be worried about automatic updates. If you commit and push on the master branch while doing some other work, this PR will automatically update with this other work.

You can use git checkout -b newbranchname to make a new branch.

@chemelnucfin chemelnucfin added api: storage Issues related to the Cloud Storage API. type: feature request ‘Nice-to-have’ improvement, new feature or different behavior or design. labels Dec 7, 2017
@davidebelloni
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi,
I think to have added tests. Your question about others params and functions are correct, but for my goal should be enough this commits. I'm trying to "restore" all the bucket's objects, live and versioned, with a specific metadata.

I'm not so expert about git. About PR, what you mean is to make a branch on my repo fork about this feature and do the PR relative to this branch? I'm not an active developer on this repo.

Thanks

@chemelnucfin
Copy link
Contributor

@dhermes @tseaver Any comments regarding the other possible kwargs or other functions that could use these possible kwargs?

@davidebelloni Yes, git is confusing. I understand that this might be your single pull request, but I just wanted to let you know in case you push to the master branch again, this PR would have automatically update with that commit, which might not be what you want. It's not a big deal for us, but it might make future PRs easier for you to work with.

@davidebelloni
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @chemelnucfin ,
you are right about git, but in this case there's no problem.

Are you waiting for something from me to proceed with this PR?

Thanks

@chemelnucfin
Copy link
Contributor

@davidebelloni Hi, I don't see anything that immediately jumps out at me, but since I'm relatively new here I would love to hear @dhermes or @tseaver comments also. Thanks for the PR.

@tseaver tseaver changed the title Storage: sourceGeneration in copy_blob #4533 Storage: support 'sourceGeneration' in 'copy_blob' Dec 21, 2017
@tseaver tseaver merged commit 23512ea into googleapis:master Dec 21, 2017
@tseaver
Copy link
Contributor

tseaver commented Dec 21, 2017

@davidebelloni Thank you for the patch!

@davidebelloni
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @tseaver ,
when you think that this code will be public in 1.7.0 google-cloud-storage version?

@tseaver
Copy link
Contributor

tseaver commented Jan 10, 2018

@jonparrott, @frankyn Is there any reason we need to delay a 1.7.0 release?

@theacodes
Copy link
Contributor

go for it

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
api: storage Issues related to the Cloud Storage API. cla: yes This human has signed the Contributor License Agreement. type: feature request ‘Nice-to-have’ improvement, new feature or different behavior or design.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants