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

feat: ffi verifier cli #265

Draft
wants to merge 48 commits into
base: archived/feat/ffi-provider
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mikegeeves
Copy link
Contributor

@mikegeeves mikegeeves commented Sep 21, 2021

Here's where the code is up to, I've merged in recent changes which have gone into master (the updates to setup.py to handle downloading the binaries for example, so the rust ones can then follow the same approach). The CLI is working with the auto-generated click arguments and looks like it works ok, but aware there are concerns with this approach, so pushing over where this is currently up to to figure out what to do next.

Note: this is using a not yet released FFI version, so I was running with a built 0.0.3 FFI from pact-reference

elliottmurray and others added 30 commits July 17, 2021 13:26
…e changes to docker37 which I will need to do to all
The return code is straightforward, but having problems with the logging. When setting up the FFI
objects etc, it doesn't seem to work unless it's a basically a singleton, it seems hard to split up.
I don't like it but going with this for now :)
Install all ruby standalone packages when running sdist.

Devloppers can also now provide a --bin-path that contains the binaries required
for their OS, so that can they use this package in offline environments.
…dation#257)

* feat: added support for message provider using pact broker

* fix: added new line

* fix: update tests to support pact-broker runs
fix: updated message_pact to wait writing contract process to finish

* fix: removed time from import
@mikegeeves mikegeeves changed the title Feat/ffi provider mike feat: ffi verifier cli Sep 21, 2021
@mikegeeves
Copy link
Contributor Author

Can't see what snyk is complaining about, is it possible to get access or limited number of users etc?

@mefellows
Copy link
Member

Hi @mikegeeves, sorry I missed this - have enabled notifications on this repo.

Do you need a second pair of eyes or anything over this?

@YOU54F YOU54F linked an issue Jul 11, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
@JP-Ellis JP-Ellis mentioned this pull request Sep 27, 2023
47 tasks
@JP-Ellis JP-Ellis marked this pull request as draft September 27, 2023 03:59
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.

Installer
5 participants