Skip to content

Conversation

@adityachoudhari26
Copy link
Contributor

@adityachoudhari26 adityachoudhari26 commented Apr 14, 2025

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features
    • Updated the command-line flag for specifying the version selector when creating a policy. The flag is now --version-selector with an updated description for clearer usage.

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Apr 14, 2025

Walkthrough

This update modifies the command used in the policy creation API. The command-line flag specifying the version selector in the NewCreatePolicyCmd function has been renamed from --deployment-version-selector to --version-selector, and its description has been updated accordingly. This change will affect how users specify the version selector when creating a policy.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
cmd/ctrlc/root/api/create/policy/policy.go Renamed flag from --deployment-version-selector to --version-selector and updated its description to reflect the change.

Poem

Hopping through code with a joyful grin,
I found a flag that needed a spin.
From long to short, a name so grand,
Aligning our policy just as planned.
Cheers from a rabbit with a carrot in hand!

✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai plan to trigger planning for file edits and PR creation.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (4)
cmd/ctrlc/root/api/create/policy/policy.go (4)

196-196: Flag name updated, but variable name remains inconsistent

The flag has been renamed from --deployment-version-selector to --version-selector, which aligns with the PR objectives. However, the variable name deploymentVersionSelector hasn't been updated to match the new flag name. For better code clarity and maintainability, consider renaming the variable to versionSelector to match the flag name.

- var deploymentVersionSelector string
+ var versionSelector string

// Later in the code:
- cmd.Flags().StringVar(&deploymentVersionSelector, "version-selector", "", "JSON string for version selector")
+ cmd.Flags().StringVar(&versionSelector, "version-selector", "", "JSON string for version selector")

// And in other places where the variable is used:
- if deploymentVersionSelector != "" {
+ if versionSelector != "" {
  
- if err := json.Unmarshal([]byte(deploymentVersionSelector), &selector); err != nil {
+ if err := json.Unmarshal([]byte(versionSelector), &selector); err != nil {

138-151: Update comment to match the flag name change

The comment on line 138 still refers to "deployment version selector" but the flag has been updated to "version selector". For consistency, update the comment to match the new terminology.

- // Parse deployment version selector
+ // Parse version selector

39-39: Example uses old flag naming convention

The example on line 39 shows usage of --deployment-selector, which is consistent with the pattern of the newly renamed --version-selector flag. Consider updating the usage examples to demonstrate the --version-selector flag as well.

- # Create a new policy with deployment selector
- $ ctrlc create policy --name my-policy --workspace-id 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000 --deployment-selector '{"type": "production"}'
+ # Create a new policy with deployment selector
+ $ ctrlc create policy --name my-policy --workspace-id 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000 --deployment-selector '{"type": "production"}'
+
+ # Create a new policy with version selector
+ $ ctrlc create policy --name my-policy --workspace-id 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000 --version-selector '{"version": "1.0.0"}'

143-145: Update error message to match flag name

The error message still references "deployment version selector" rather than the new flag name. Update it to maintain consistency with the renamed flag.

- return fmt.Errorf("invalid deployment version selector JSON: %w", err)
+ return fmt.Errorf("invalid version selector JSON: %w", err)
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between df3514b and 694ef79.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • cmd/ctrlc/root/api/create/policy/policy.go (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
cmd/ctrlc/root/api/create/policy/policy.go (1)

147-151:

❓ Verification inconclusive

Code works correctly despite terminology inconsistency

The parameter is correctly mapped to the API DeploymentVersionSelector type, so functionally this change works. However, the inconsistency between variable names and flag names may cause confusion for future maintainers.


🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
# Check if there are any other references to "deployment-version-selector" or "deploymentVersionSelector" 
# in the codebase that might need updating for consistency

echo "Searching for other references to deployment version selector..."
rg --no-filename "deployment-version-selector" || echo "No other references to old flag name found"
rg --no-filename "deploymentVersionSelector" -g "!policy.go" || echo "No other references to variable name found outside this file"

Length of output: 624


Action: Standardize Naming for Clarity in DeploymentVersionSelector Usage

The functional mapping to the API’s DeploymentVersionSelector is correct; however, the naming inconsistency between the flag (deployment-version-selector) and the internal variable (DeploymentVersionSelector) might confuse future maintainers. Our search confirmed that the legacy flag name isn’t spread across the codebase, but the API’s naming is consistently used elsewhere. Consider aligning the flag and variable names or adding a clarifying comment if the divergence is intentional.

  • File: cmd/ctrlc/root/api/create/policy/policy.go (lines 147-151)
  • Snippet for Reference:
    parsedDeploymentVersionSelector = &api.DeploymentVersionSelector{
        DeploymentVersionSelector: selector,
        Name:                      name,
    }

@adityachoudhari26 adityachoudhari26 merged commit 2830709 into main Apr 14, 2025
2 checks passed
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.

3 participants