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

Support SSRC conditions #2487

Merged
merged 47 commits into from
Mar 21, 2024
Merged

Support SSRC conditions #2487

merged 47 commits into from
Mar 21, 2024

Conversation

erikeldridge
Copy link
Contributor

@erikeldridge erikeldridge commented Mar 5, 2024

Add support for condition evaluation.

Note this is based on #2496.

Discussion

Working with @lahirumaramba and @trekforever.

Testing

Ran npm test and all tests pass.

Functionally tested using a local server.

@trekforever trekforever force-pushed the ssrc-percent branch 2 times, most recently from bab6beb to 44591cd Compare March 6, 2024 22:52
Base automatically changed from ssrc-remove-async-getter to ssrc-rename-default March 7, 2024 18:06
@erikeldridge erikeldridge changed the base branch from ssrc-rename-default to ssrc March 8, 2024 17:29
@erikeldridge erikeldridge changed the title WIP: SSRC conditions Support SSRC conditions Mar 8, 2024
*/
export interface RemoteConfigServerCondition {
export interface RemoteConfigServerNamedCondition {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@lahirumaramba I see some interfaces with the RemoteConfig prefix and others without. Is there a guideline for what needs the prefix?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I can't recall a reason. Looking at this proposal (go/admin-sdk-remote-config) from 2020 it looks like the types that were added later are missing the prefix.... maybe we weren't strict about the prefix in follow up proposals?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I was just reviewing a change for the REST API and I think what happened is the TS API naming biased toward the REST API. The REST API has nested protos, but TS interfaces can't be nested. The parent protos had more qualified names than the child protos. When we created interfaces to match the protos, we retained the existing names.

I think the guideline we discussed against product prefixes still holds and will help the TS API be more consistent.

@erikeldridge
Copy link
Contributor Author

erikeldridge commented Mar 11, 2024

@lahirumaramba Any idea what could cause the "Continuous Integration / build (14.x)" failure? I installed Node 14 on my machine and ran npm install and npm run test:unit and everything worked.

I'm guessing farmhash might be pulling in a dep that's unsupported on Node 14, since that's the only new dep.

Double scratch that. I see @fastify/busboy is an existing dep of the Admin SDK. Is this a known issue?

@erikeldridge
Copy link
Contributor Author

erikeldridge commented Mar 14, 2024

@lahirumaramba Any idea what could cause the "Continuous Integration / build (14.x)" failure? I installed Node 14 on my machine and ran npm install and npm run test:unit and everything worked.

I'm guessing farmhash might be pulling in a dep that's unsupported on Node 14, since that's the only new dep.

Double scratch that. I see @fastify/busboy is an existing dep of the Admin SDK. Is this a known issue?

Lahiru and I discussed offline. For future ref, he suggested deleting and regenerating package-lock.json, which fixed the issue.

@erikeldridge erikeldridge changed the base branch from ssrc to ssrc-prefix March 15, 2024 22:22
Copy link
Member

@lahirumaramba lahirumaramba left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks! LGTM!

Base automatically changed from ssrc-prefix to ssrc March 21, 2024 20:22
@erikeldridge erikeldridge merged commit 02c0559 into ssrc Mar 21, 2024
5 checks passed
@erikeldridge erikeldridge deleted the ssrc-percent branch March 21, 2024 22:24
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