-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
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
DM-22162: Add metadata writing to PipelineTask execution logic (pipe_base) #110
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually Thinking about this now, I dont think is possible with the new pipeline object to have a task that does not have a label specified.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm looking at the code in ctrl_mpexec for task with no label, I didnt remove the ? in the regex, and or change make pipeline to use the task name if there is no label. This will lead to weird/broken behavior. If you dont want to change on this ticket, that's fine. I can make a ticket and fix that behavior.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we don't want to force users to always provide label on the command line so if label is missing then it should come from
_DefaultName
. To know_DefaultName
I need to import task class and this is where I thought is the most natural place for it. I do not want to import anything when command line is parsed, and another potential place for that is inCmdLineFwk
class but I think that if I do it here it will be more generic. Of course if you say thatPipeline.addTask
method has to receive non-empty label then I'd simply add a check here and movedoImport
toCmdLineFwk
instead.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@natelust, let me know if you want me to move that
doImport
toCmdLineFwk
before I merge both branches, should be easy for me to do, certainly faster than opening another ticket.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I guess this is fine here, I really dont like the doImport in either place, as it is done again later. One thing we talked about doing in the future is not having a _DefaultName at all, and using the name of the task in places where _DefaultName would have been used. How would you feel about just using the string name of the class for the label here? I think @TallJimbo might have had and opinion as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm OK with using class name instead of _DefaultName, but I know that _DefaultName has a long history and this should probably be discussed with wider audience. Just tell me what to do, I'll do it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Lets stick with
_DefaultName
for now. I'd like to replace that with the unqualified Task name or something derived from it eventually (and then take advantage of that to e.g. avoid thedoImport
here), but until we've done that more globally, using the unqualified Task name here just exacerbates the problem of having too many names for a Task.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK, I'll merge it as it is now.