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
#3826: print the appropriate message for the nested stack #3827
Conversation
# Store a map of stack name to stack information for quick reference -> self._stacks | ||
# and detect remote stacks -> self._remote_stack_full_paths | ||
self._stacks: Dict[str, Stack] = {} | ||
self.remote_stack_full_paths: List[str] = [] | ||
self._extract_stacks() | ||
|
||
LOG.debug("%d nested stacks found in the template", len(self._stacks)) |
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.
self._stacks
contains the root stack as well, I think it is better to leave it stacks found ...
instead of nested stacks ...
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.
@moelasmar cool - I've done the amendment
Thanks @stavros-zavrakas for your contribution |
@moelasmar it seems that there are two steps that are failing in the CI with the error code (429) Too Many Requests. Is there something that I need to do from my side? |
no @stavros-zavrakas ... it was a temporary issue, I re-ran them, and all steps passed successfully. |
I will check with the team to find another reviewer so we can merge this PR. Thanks @stavros-zavrakas again for your contributions |
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.
LGTM! Thanks @stavros-zavrakas for the contribution!
Which issue(s) does this change fix?
It fixes the issue #3826
Why is this change necessary?
Because the debug message is wrong
How does it address the issue?
We are printing the appropriate message
What side effects does this change have?
N/A
Mandatory Checklist
PRs will only be reviewed after checklist is complete
make pr
passesmake update-reproducible-reqs
if dependencies were changedBy submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.