Copy run-action command to run with feature flag #10568
Conversation
wallyworld
force-pushed
the
separate-run-action
branch
from
b9570ce
to
9f6f40e
Compare
wallyworld
force-pushed
the
separate-run-action
branch
2 times, most recently
from
91a3eaa
to
32de276
Compare
cmd/juju/action/call.go
Outdated
| return modelcmd.Wrap(&callCommand{}) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // runCommand enqueues an Action for running on the given unit with given |
| juju call mysql/3 backup --wait | ||
| juju call mysql/3 backup | ||
| juju call mysql/leader backup | ||
| juju show-action-output <ID> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not sure that you need 'show-action-output example among 'call' command examples :D
There was a problem hiding this comment.
show-action-output is still a valid command to see the result of calling an action.
It will be renamed however to show-operation in the next PR
cmd/juju/action/call.go
Outdated
| for _, arg := range args[len(c.unitReceivers)+1:] { | ||
| thisArg := strings.SplitN(arg, "=", 2) | ||
| if len(thisArg) != 2 { | ||
| return errors.Errorf("argument %q must be of the form key...=value", arg) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe best to say key.key.key...=value as per Info().Args?
cmd/juju/action/call.go
Outdated
| "and contain only lowercase alphanumeric and hyphens", key) | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| // c.args={..., [key, key, key, key, value]} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
remove me? or re-phrase me :D
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Existing code, removed in next PR but will do so here instead
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Legacy Juju 1.25 output format for a single unit, no wait. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OMG, are we still supporting this? Originally we said 'only for the life of trusty'... well, it's past EOL.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (c *callCommand) Run(ctx *cmd.Context) error { | ||
| if err := c.ensureAPI(); err != nil { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is kind of a problem since we close api later on but this method can still return it. I do prefer commands having function to obtain new API rather than caching the api.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, this is all existing, just a straight copy. Will try to clean up as work progresses
cmd/juju/action/call.go
Outdated
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| out := make(map[string]interface{}, len(results.Results)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This name is so close to c.out... Can it be named something else, say 'results'?
| @@ -645,6 +645,7 @@ func (s *MainSuite) TestHelpCommands(c *gc.C) { | |||
| cmdSet := set.NewStrings(commandNames...) | |||
| if !featureflag.Enabled(feature.JujuV3) { | |||
| cmdSet.Add("run-action") | |||
| cmdSet.Add("run") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"run" is what's needed here.
If feature flag is not enabled, there is a run command
wallyworld
force-pushed
the
separate-run-action
branch
from
5c085a1
to
9974123
Compare
|
|
wallyworld
force-pushed
the
separate-run-action
branch
from
9974123
to
c742cbb
Compare
|
|
Description of change
To prepare for implementing the new juju call (action), copy the existing juju run-action command so that the new version can be easily changed, leaving the legacy run-action version untouched. The changes will be significant and easier to do separately in a new command rather than adding feature flag logic to the existing run-action command.
The runaction(_test).go and call(_test).go files are straight copies of run(_test).go
QA steps
ensure juju run-action works still