Skip to content

Conversation

@padovan
Copy link
Contributor

@padovan padovan commented Dec 6, 2024

  • improve main description phrase
  • rename 'results' cmd to 'maestro-results'

We want to do more that just submit tests, so let's open
up the description.

Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.com>
The results command is accessing the Maestro API directly
for fetching results. We want to build an origin agnostic
infra, so let's rename this one to 'maestro-results' for
clarity.

Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.com>
cli.add_command(commit.commit)
cli.add_command(patch.patch)
cli.add_command(results.results)
cli.add_command(maestro_results.maestro_results)
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@aliceinwire @nuclearcat I wonder if we shouldn't in the future have a maestro subcommand and fold all the maestro stuff as subcommands of that.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should not make also cli too complex. Maybe if commands will be more or less common, we can just hide it in configuration file, like --instance=maestro_production and in config it will be:
[maestro_production]
type=maestro
url=....
But if functionality will be unique, then it is different thing.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should not make also cli too complex.

completely agree, also we should not make terminology too complex, kci-dev need to be simple to use and "hide" all the KernelCI internal complex structure and terminology.
kci-dev users shouldn't know what is "maestro" for using kci-dev, they just need a way to get results logs from KernelCI.
I could maybe accept some sub-command like "--source="

@aliceinwire aliceinwire marked this pull request as draft December 9, 2024 02:18
@padovan
Copy link
Contributor Author

padovan commented Dec 9, 2024

I moved the first commit to another PR (#58) and will close this one for further discussion at issue #57.

@padovan padovan closed this Dec 9, 2024
@padovan padovan deleted the cmd-improvements branch December 9, 2024 19:02
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