-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 67
Update controller_revision class constructor, documentation and add 'to_dict' parameters validation #1444
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
Conversation
…to_dict' parameters validation
…rapper into controller_revision
|
Report bugs in Issues The following are automatically added:
Available user actions:
Supported /retest check runs* /retest tox - Retest tox * /retest sonarqube - Retest sonarqube * /retest python-module-install - Retest python-module-installSupported labels
|
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
ocp_resources/controller_revision.py
Outdated
| """ | ||
| Args: | ||
| owner_references (list): List of objects depended on this object. | ||
| revision_object (int): indicates the revision of the state represented by Data. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@oharan2 update revision_object description; it is not an int.
revision_object is object spec.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
see that revision (int64), required is missing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I thought the revision_object and the revision parameter is referring the same, will update
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@rnetser Do I need to validate the Int64 (as recently committed)?
many cases might pass a regular int and I suggested to maintain this requirement.
ocp_resources/controller_revision.py
Outdated
| """ | ||
| Args: | ||
| owner_references (list): List of objects depended on this object. | ||
| revision_object (int): indicates the revision of the state represented by Data. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@oharan2 update revision_object description; it is not an int.
revision_object is object spec.
ocp_resources/controller_revision.py
Outdated
| """ | ||
| Args: | ||
| owner_references (list): List of objects depended on this object. | ||
| revision_object (int): indicates the revision of the state represented by Data. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
see that revision (int64), required is missing
…rapper into controller_revision
…thon-wrapper into controller_revision
| packaging = "^23.1" | ||
| python-simple-logger = "^1.0.6" | ||
| jinja2 = "^3.1.2" | ||
| numpy = "*" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do not edit this file directly, use poetry add
| Args: | ||
| owner_references (list, optional): List of objects depended on this object. | ||
| revision_object (object, optional): the Data Object representing the state. | ||
| revision (int64): indicates the revision of the state represented by Data. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You specify that the code expect int64 but in the code you convert it to int64
We need to get it from the user and only validate that the user was sent us int64
Short description:
More details:
What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Special notes for reviewer:
Bug: