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: use lassie for retrievals #149

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 2, 2022
Merged

feat: use lassie for retrievals #149

merged 4 commits into from
Dec 2, 2022

Conversation

rvagg
Copy link
Collaborator

@rvagg rvagg commented Nov 25, 2022

Not intended to be merged (yet anyway, we can have that conversation later). This is for dev purposes to make sure we get interfaces right and give me something functional so I can actually use code over in lassie for something real.

Depends on:

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Nov 25, 2022

Codecov Report

Base: 20.90% // Head: 5.70% // Decreases project coverage by -15.20% ⚠️

Coverage data is based on head (0a575d2) compared to base (f1df860).
Patch coverage: 0.00% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #149       +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   20.90%   5.70%   -15.21%     
==========================================
  Files          16      10        -6     
  Lines        2334    1490      -844     
==========================================
- Hits          488      85      -403     
+ Misses       1816    1401      -415     
+ Partials       30       4       -26     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
autoretrieve.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
bitswap/provider.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
config.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
endpoint/estuary.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
endpoint/indexer.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@hannahhoward
Copy link
Collaborator

@rvagg @kylehuntsman 's PR is merged can we move this forward? Any reason not to?

@rvagg
Copy link
Collaborator Author

rvagg commented Dec 1, 2022

application-research/filclient#112 is the blocker, and it's blocked by having a tagged boost—we could just use an untagged master over there but I don't think we need to rush this, I'm happy to keep this branch updated on both ends for now

@rvagg rvagg marked this pull request as ready for review December 2, 2022 01:07
Copy link
Contributor

@elijaharita elijaharita left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

looks great! dropping-in the current filclient on the retriever interface is a very clean transition to get started. if it's working, you have my blessing!

@hannahhoward hannahhoward merged commit cb0b9e3 into master Dec 2, 2022
@rvagg rvagg deleted the rvagg/lassie branch December 2, 2022 03:37
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.

None yet

4 participants