-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 93
Add one-time move to the versioning override API! #808
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
Open
Shivs11
wants to merge
5
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
ss/one-time-versioning-override-api
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+75
−0
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
39d3ef8
Add one-time versioning override API
Shivs11 4766bf7
Rename one-time versioning override type
Shivs11 f9ce673
Clarify one-time override routing comment
Shivs11 daa1442
Clarify one-time override completion semantics
Shivs11 0553ec2
Suppress linter for one-time override field
Shivs11 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Some comments aren't visible on the classic Files Changed page.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
I have given this naming some more thought. What do you think about?
MoveAndKeepDefaultBehavior: this clearly tells the behavior. move to version X, then respect whatever is the default versioning configuration defined in code. It tells this is not sticky unlike PinnedOverride where it moves to version X and stays put.
Also add the following to the comment:
When you moves the wf from version x to y, and a new version z arrives.
Personally, I would avoid using temporary.
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.
I quite like the model that you took when naming this, however, the only thing that bothers me is the word "Default" -- the thing is, in worker-versioning, you have two things that could be the "Default" for the true versioning behaviour of a workflow; they are:
When you have a versioning behaviour that is defined on the workflow type, that's the behaviour that is always followed.
Having said that, here are some of the things that came to my head the second I read your suggestion:
curious to hear your thoughts on this @rkannan82