Skip to content

Conversation

@mitchell-as
Copy link
Collaborator

@mitchell-as mitchell-as commented Nov 3, 2025

https://activestatef.atlassian.net/browse/CP-1137

Ecosystem namespaces will contain a mix of dynamically-imported artifacts and platform-built artifacts.

DI artifacts produced by the star-builder should invoke an ecosystem-specific installation procedure.

Artifacts produced by other platform builders should be installed as normal.

Note: uninstallation will not work because depot artifacts are not tied to builders. This will need to be addressed in a follow-up ticket.

Ecosystem namespaces will contain a mix of dynamically-imported artifacts and built artifacts.

DI artifacts produced by the star-builder should invoke an ecosystem-specific installation procedure.

Artifacts produced by other builders should be installed as normal.

Note: uninstallation will not work because depot artifacts are not tied to builders. This will need to be addressed in a follow-up ticket.
@mitchell-as
Copy link
Collaborator Author

mitchell-as commented Nov 3, 2025

Ignore the failing tests, they are known failures and unrelated to this PR.

I am interested in knowing whether or not this is a reasonable approach for distinguishing between DI vs. platform artifacts to install. You don't have to worry too much about the Go if you don't want to.

@mitchell-as mitchell-as marked this pull request as ready for review November 3, 2025 22:20
Comment on lines +32 to +34
if a.Builder != nil && a.Builder.DisplayName != starBuilder {
return false
}
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is the crux of the PR. If an artifact's builder is not a star-builder, it cannot match a DI ecosystem for install and will go through the usual State Tool artifact install.

Copy link
Contributor

@ucodery ucodery left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am unfamiliar with state tool buildplan walking code, but the premise of this PR seems sound. I think that the viability of the star-builder won't last, so matching on a literal name seems to fit the scale of the fix.

@mitchell-as mitchell-as merged commit 4a942c2 into master Nov 4, 2025
13 of 23 checks passed
@mitchell-as mitchell-as deleted the mitchell/cp-1137 branch November 4, 2025 08:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants