Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Incident bucket #107
Incident bucket #107
Changes from 8 commits
be08fc6
49f4ca2
84e8a0a
b86dac3
07514d7
cf9ed97
354560b
8a99054
91b9443
2601c31
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Same comments for all: Shouldn't this be
uri
instead ofuri-reference
? Main concern is with interoperability, the reader must then know intricate knowledge of the sender e.g. which cluster is it deployed in.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.
This is how it is defined in the spec https://github.com/cdevents/spec/blob/v0.1.1/spec.md#source-context so not anything defined in this PR.
The initial reason for that is that source is a URI-reference in CloudEvents. I don't think we can enforce a URI here really since not all event sources will have a URI associated, but we could do a better job at describe the format of URI-references - I'm tracking this in #29
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.
The main reason for my objection about the
uri-reference
was that it allows relative urls. Basically you can have a system with two sources having the same source as they differ on the host which is not part of thesource
field.Regarding this PR: These are the only events that have uri-reference in the schemas. I would suggest to remove it here an do a PR to add it in all the events. Main motivation for this is to keep the protocol consistent, why have do we have one event with this but not all.
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'd say this PR should align with how the existing schemas look, and aligning the usage or uri/uri-reference should be done in #114
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 updated this PR - alternatively we could merge #116 first, and bring back the URI-reference format here.