refactor(db)!: remove SourceObject.iter_virtual_sources from our API #1106
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
BREAKING CHANGE: though a search of Lektor plugins on GitHub and PyPI did not find any instance where a non-empty `iter_virtual_sources` was defined
dairiki
force-pushed
the
refactor.iter_virtual_sources
branch
from
751730d
to
371c543
Compare
dairiki
added a commit
to dairiki/lektor
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 11, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The SourceObject.iter_virtual_sources method was introduced in PR #118. It is called (only) in Database.track_record_dependency to identify virtual sources to declare dependencies upon.
I have searched the Lektor source, as well as all of the Lektor plugins I can find on PyPI and GitHub, and have only found one instance where
iter_virtual_sourcesreturns anything other than an empty set. That is VirtualSourceObject.iter_virtual_sources, which returns only a single virtual source:self.(Here is a search, purportedly of all the public repositories on GitHub, for iter_virtual_sources.)
It doesn't seem to make any sense for a record to declare a virtual source object as a dependency. Generally, records depend on the data and datamodel files (the
.lrand.inifiles) that define their content and behavior. What would it mean for a record to depend on another record? (And even if that were allowed, why only allow records to depend on other virtual sources but not regular non-virtual sources?)PR #118 introduced this API, but didn't use it. The PR introduced the
Siblingsvirtual source object. But it doesn't get introduced to an artifact's dependencies by way ofSourceObject.iter_virtual_sources. The Siblings virtual source object gets declared as a dependency of the current artifact when it is accessed in Page.get_siblings(). (This makes perfect sense: when a source object is accessed during the building of an artifact it gets added to the dependency list.)Breaking Change
This is potentially a breaking change, despite the fact that I can find no code that uses this feature.
We could first deprecate the API — issuing a warning whenever
iter_virtual_sourcesreturns anything unexpected — before removing it altogether. But I highly suspect nobody is using this bit of API.Issue(s) Resolved
Cleans out unused code. Removes confusing and not particularly useful API.