gadget: allow content observer to have opinions about a change #9401
Conversation
Allow content observers to have opinions about a given change, with the ability to request the original content to be preserved. Signed-off-by: Maciej Borzecki <maciej.zenon.borzecki@canonical.com>
Signed-off-by: Maciej Borzecki <maciej.zenon.borzecki@canonical.com>
Signed-off-by: Maciej Borzecki <maciej.zenon.borzecki@canonical.com>
Signed-off-by: Maciej Borzecki <maciej.zenon.borzecki@canonical.com>
gadget/update.go
Outdated
|
|
||
| const ( | ||
| ContentWrite ContentOperation = iota | ||
| ContentUpdate | ||
| ContentRollback | ||
|
|
||
| ChangeExecute ContentChangeDisposition = iota |
gadget/update.go
Outdated
|
|
||
| const ( | ||
| ContentWrite ContentOperation = iota | ||
| ContentUpdate | ||
| ContentRollback | ||
|
|
||
| ChangeExecute ContentChangeDisposition = iota | ||
| ChangeAbort |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should this be the first value of the enum given that is used with errors to follow go patterns?
gadget/update.go
Outdated
| @@ -61,11 +61,16 @@ type ContentChange struct { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| type ContentOperation int | |||
| type ContentChangeDisposition int | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we'll need a native speaker input here: should this be:
- ...ChangeDisposition
- ...ChangeResolution
- ...ChangeDecision
- ...ChangeAction
or yet something else?
@anonymouse64 or @degville any input on this?
the values of this can be like: apply, abort, preserve as seen below
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Action sounds the most natural to me I think
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Action sounds the most natural to me I think
Yes, I agree.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the input. ChangeAction it is then.
Signed-off-by: Maciej Borzecki <maciej.zenon.borzecki@canonical.com>
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return false, nil |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the intention expressed by false here (it was anyway not yet used) was wrong? will we even use the value of ContentChangeAction for rollback?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The use of false here was wrong, I tried to have the code return true for al the cases where it's fine to proceed with the change.
As for the rollback scenario, I don't see any need for inspecting the returned value at this point.
…serve-through-observer
Signed-off-by: Maciej Borzecki <maciej.zenon.borzecki@canonical.com>
Allow content observers to have opinions about a given change, with the ability
to request the original content to be preserved.