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

Little bit of polishing in the execution engine #892

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 3, 2019
Merged

Conversation

alenkacz
Copy link
Contributor

@alenkacz alenkacz commented Oct 3, 2019

What this PR does / why we need it:
Yesterday when working on tasker with @zen-dog we identified these small things that were left behind in the refactoring, especially embedding the one metadata in the other seems like a natural choice.

Copy link
Contributor

@zen-dog zen-dog left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🚢

@@ -25,22 +25,20 @@ import (

const basePath = "/kustomize"

// metadata contains metadata associated with current PlanExecution
// metadata contains metadata associated with current plan being executed
type metadata struct {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You could also make metadata exportable since we would use it in the tasker branch but that's a soft nit

@@ -25,22 +25,20 @@ import (

const basePath = "/kustomize"

// metadata contains metadata associated with current PlanExecution
// metadata contains metadata associated with current plan being executed
type metadata struct {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Also, metadata as a name is pretty broad. wdyt about engineMetadata? or maybe this one is more of executionMetadata and the existing one is more like kudoResourceMetadata?

zen-dog added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 3, 2019
Proposed implementation does *not* make use of the `MutliTask` pipeline. It rather calls sideeffect free methods like `render`, `enhance` or `delete`. Templates, params, client are part of the context. Metadata is not yet everything it needs to be but #892 fixes that.
@alenkacz alenkacz merged commit 18d6550 into master Oct 3, 2019
@alenkacz alenkacz deleted the av/instance-polish branch October 3, 2019 16:52
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

3 participants