-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7.8k
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
feat(Splunk Node): Overhaul #9813
Conversation
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
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.
The changes mostly look good, and the manual test works perfectly. I have left a few comments to improve code quality. Additionally, for future improvements, consider restructuring the code to support multiple node versions in a separate PR.
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.
there is a lot of similarity between the actions code, could be refactored in away to improve code readability and maintainability? Consider abstracting the common functionality into a helper function or class to reduce duplication and make future changes easier.
}, {}); | ||
} | ||
|
||
if (splunkObject['s:dict']) { |
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.
suggestion: avoid using magic strings 's:dict' is used in many places, to enhance maintainability, readability, and reduce the risk of errors, consider defining it as a constant.
) { | ||
const id = this.getNodeParameter(idType, i) as string; | ||
|
||
return id.includes(endpoint) ? id.split(endpoint).pop()! : id; |
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.
is ! (non null assertion) here necessary?
…splunk-node-overhaul
…splunk-node-overhaul
✅ All Cypress E2E specs passed |
3 flaky tests on run #5784 ↗︎
Details:
5-ndv.cy.ts • 2 flaky tests
24-ndv-paired-item.cy.ts • 1 flaky test
Review all test suite changes for PR #9813 ↗︎ |
Got released with |
Summary
updated/reorganized resources
new operations added
optimizations to request (json instead xml)
added tests
Review / Merge checklist
https://linear.app/n8n/issue/NODE-1395/splunk-node-overhaul