-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 205
Allow triggering deployment when application is at out-of-sync state #2777
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
Conversation
pipecd-bot
left a comment
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.
pipecd-bot
left a comment
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.
|
Test |
Nice catch! |
217e8d0 to
bb43c35
Compare
pipecd-bot
left a comment
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.
|
Code coverage for golang is
|
|
Code coverage for golang is
|
|
/lgtm |
| // Whether to exclude application from triggering target | ||
| // when application is at OUT_OF_SYNC state. | ||
| // Default is true. | ||
| Disabled bool `json:"disabled,omitempty" default:"true"` |
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.
nits, with this default:"true" labels on boolean type value, even if users explicitly set spec.input.trigger.onOutOfSync.Disable: false, they still can not enable trigger new deployment on out of sync.
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.
Sorry, what do you mean?
Why " they still can not enable trigger new deployment on out of sync"?
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 think I got your point. The "defaults" lib is configuring that field to be true whenever its value is false, doesn't matter if it was specified explicitly or not. So its final value always will be true, right?
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.
Yes, so I think we may need *bool for this case 🤔
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.
Right. *bool or defined a new Bool type for that case. Let me fix it. Nice catch!
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.
btw, other places (such as autoRollback configuration) have this issue as well, so addressing that issue by a separated PR is fine, but I just want to explicitly mention it to ensure everyone aware of that issue.
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.
Right. *bool or defined a new Bool type for that case. Let me fix it. Nice catch!
Thanks, will fix other places by separated PR later 👍
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.
@khanhtc1202 I have added a TODO to this PR. And let me fix all of those things by a separate PR.
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.
🙆♀️
|
The following ISSUES will be created once got merged. If you want me to skip creating the issue, you can use Details1. Remove deprecated
|
|
Code coverage for golang is
|
|
Nice work 🚀 |

What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: