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

Lightning cloud client call with key word arguments #14685

Merged
merged 16 commits into from
Sep 14, 2022

Conversation

hhsecond
Copy link
Contributor

@hhsecond hhsecond commented Sep 13, 2022

What does this PR do?

We recently had changed the OpenAPI client to be generated using latest swagger CLI (the older one had a nasty memory leak) which is forcing us to use the generated client calls to be using key value arguments instead of positional arguments. This PR converts all our client call to have key value arguments

Does your PR introduce any breaking changes? If yes, please list them.

Before submitting

  • Was this discussed/approved via a GitHub issue? (not for typos and docs)
  • Did you read the contributor guideline, Pull Request section?
  • Did you make sure your PR does only one thing, instead of bundling different changes together?
  • Did you make sure to update the documentation with your changes? (if necessary)
  • Did you write any new necessary tests? (not for typos and docs)
  • Did you verify new and existing tests pass locally with your changes?
  • Did you list all the breaking changes introduced by this pull request?
  • Did you update the CHANGELOG? (not for typos, docs, test updates, or minor internal changes/refactors)

PR review

Anyone in the community is welcome to review the PR.
Before you start reviewing, make sure you have read the review guidelines. In short, see the following bullet-list:

  • Is this pull request ready for review? (if not, please submit in draft mode)
  • Check that all items from Before submitting are resolved
  • Make sure the title is self-explanatory and the description concisely explains the PR
  • Add labels and milestones (and optionally projects) to the PR so it can be classified

Did you have fun?

Make sure you had fun coding 🙃

@github-actions github-actions bot added the app (removed) Generic label for Lightning App package label Sep 13, 2022
@hhsecond hhsecond marked this pull request as ready for review September 13, 2022 17:29
@hhsecond hhsecond changed the title Lightning cloud import fixes Lightning cloud client call with key word arguments Sep 13, 2022
@awaelchli
Copy link
Contributor

awaelchli commented Sep 13, 2022

@hhsecond Could you add the desired milestone? I wasn't sure, thanks

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 13, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #14685 (712e211) into master (14b36f8) will increase coverage by 0%.
The diff coverage is 78%.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master   #14685     +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage      85%      85%             
=========================================
  Files         381      327     -54     
  Lines       27634    25829   -1805     
=========================================
- Hits        23364    21950   -1414     
+ Misses       4270     3879    -391     

@hhsecond hhsecond added this to the app:0.6.x milestone Sep 14, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@tchaton tchaton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Neat !

@tchaton tchaton merged commit d579733 into master Sep 14, 2022
@tchaton tchaton deleted the lightning-cloud-import branch September 14, 2022 06:45
@mergify mergify bot added the ready PRs ready to be merged label Sep 14, 2022
@krshrimali krshrimali mentioned this pull request Sep 16, 2022
12 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
app (removed) Generic label for Lightning App package ready PRs ready to be merged
Projects
No open projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants