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

Marketplace publish service raw data #845

Merged
merged 6 commits into from Apr 9, 2019

Conversation

antho1404
Copy link
Member

@antho1404 antho1404 commented Mar 30, 2019

The marketplace was sending the content of the mesg.yml as definition, I feel it's better to have the data that has been processed (the ones directly in the database after de deployment) like that if we want we can have another source of validation and also the mesg.yml can always be compiled down to these data, the other was is not necessarily possible.

With this PR I also realized that hash and hashVersion may not be necessary in the marketplace manifest (https://github.com/mesg-foundation/core/blob/12e1b5e61aa664dc33678a155c24994489868c75/commands/marketplace_publish.go#L91-L92)

  • hash is present in the raw data
  • hashVersion is something that should be present in the raw data

This is for another PR but I would like to remove this from the marketplace and move the hashVersion that I would call just version (for service version) directly in the core.

@ilgooz this also changes the website because raw data uses arrays for the parameters and mesg.yml uses maps

@antho1404 antho1404 force-pushed the feature/marketplace-publish-service-raw-data branch from 12e1b5e to f2ef919 Compare March 30, 2019 12:49
@antho1404 antho1404 force-pushed the feature/marketplace-publish-service-raw-data branch from f2ef919 to afd2380 Compare April 8, 2019 12:41
@antho1404
Copy link
Member Author

pull request updated without the update on the image tag so ready to review cc @mesg-foundation/core

@antho1404 antho1404 force-pushed the feature/marketplace-publish-service-raw-data branch from 922e77d to 9b65307 Compare April 8, 2019 13:38
Copy link
Contributor

@ilgooz ilgooz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can you express why we introduce xxx-service?

@antho1404
Copy link
Member Author

can you express why we introduce xxx-service?

Because I did a wrong merge to resolve some conflicts and actually took some local files that I didn't wanted to commit. Sorry for that, it's reverted

if err != nil {
return err
}
fmt.Printf("%s Service deployed with sid %s and hash %s\n", pretty.SuccessSign, pretty.Success(c.service.Definition.Sid), pretty.Success(c.service.Definition.Hash))
Copy link
Contributor

@ilgooz ilgooz Apr 9, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it might be better to explicitly use hash got from deployService() here. because in future, we'll make service sids to have one-to-many relationships with service hashes.

thus, ServiceByID() may return multiple versions and maybe in desc order on deploy time but it's not guaranteed that the first hash in the array will be belong to the last publish because two publish commands may run in parallel for the different versions of same service.

Copy link
Contributor

@ilgooz ilgooz Apr 9, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

if ServiceByID(**sid**) is only going to return the last service version and ServiceByID(**hash**) will only return the same version with hash, then all ok.

Copy link
Contributor

@ilgooz ilgooz Apr 9, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

anyway, we're also using c.service.Definition so we have to make this call. let's make sure that ServiceByID(hash) will return the version for hash in future too and ServiceByID(sid) may return the latest hash.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

if ServiceByID(**sid**) is only going to return the last service version and ServiceByID(**hash**) will only return the same version with hash, then all ok.

Yeah, that's the case.

anyway, we're also using c.service.Definition so we have to make this call. let's make sure that ServiceByID(hash) will return the version for hash in future too and ServiceByID(sid) may return the latest hash.

Yep

Copy link
Contributor

@ilgooz ilgooz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

manual tests are ok

@NicolasMahe
Copy link
Member

This is for another PR but I would like to remove this from the marketplace and move the hashVersion that I would call just version (for service version) directly in the core.

Yeah that's will be nice

@NicolasMahe NicolasMahe merged commit 7905bc2 into dev Apr 9, 2019
@NicolasMahe NicolasMahe deleted the feature/marketplace-publish-service-raw-data branch April 9, 2019 14:19
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