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

Chore/metadata refactoring 2 #9262

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Aug 29, 2023
Merged

Conversation

mroz22
Copy link
Contributor

@mroz22 mroz22 commented Aug 25, 2023

Description

here I continue (#9218) adding changes to make review of #9130 feasible

Commits

1c188b0 - it is not needed to sync all the keys every time. once keys are there, they never change. when migrations come to play we call these syncs relatively more often.
c351707 - moving constatns to constants. they are going to be reused in metadataActions
3049739 - add actions refactor
3507789 - unreleated, when runnign this test locally, it wouldn't clear defaults and fail on subsequent runs.

@mroz22 mroz22 force-pushed the chore/metadata-refactoring-2 branch 2 times, most recently from 7542ad0 to 7eecf1e Compare August 25, 2023 11:27
Comment on lines 648 to 650
const nextMetadata = data
? (JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(data)) as AccountLabels)
: JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(METADATA.DEFAULT_ACCOUNT_METADATA));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Note to myself - check if as AccountLabels can be avoided here easily

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

probably yes. I am checking it now

Copy link
Contributor Author

@mroz22 mroz22 Aug 28, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

uh, not so easily :( it would require a typequard

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

maybe it's a good idea to add the sanitization (and typeguard) as a followup 🤔

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

suuuure 🤙

@matejkriz
Copy link
Member

@mroz22 prettier check failed, other than that LGTM

@mroz22 mroz22 force-pushed the chore/metadata-refactoring-2 branch from 1e37370 to 93002e2 Compare August 29, 2023 08:45
@mroz22 mroz22 marked this pull request as ready for review August 29, 2023 08:45
Copy link
Member

@matejkriz matejkriz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

looks valid and still works as expected

@matejkriz matejkriz merged commit 70f046f into develop Aug 29, 2023
5 of 6 checks passed
@matejkriz matejkriz deleted the chore/metadata-refactoring-2 branch August 29, 2023 10:30
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
No open projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants