Switch from BoolTrue to optional.Option[bool]

[6543]

as per #1835 (comment)

the BoolTrue is cursed as it exloites the bool type and use it inferted ... this mostly works but if you de-/serialize it things get messed up.

instead now we store if it was set or not and what it value was and make the defaulting to true if not set an explicit thing in our if logics ... this also alows us to reserialize it as much as we want

[6543]

the difference is before we default to true by serializing now we default to true by in code bool operations

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 15.38462% with 11 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 21.15%. Comparing base (393a598) to head (ca2d72d).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
pipeline/frontend/yaml/constraint/constraint.go	0.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
pipeline/frontend/yaml/constraint/path.go	28.57%	5 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5693      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   21.20%   21.15%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         425      424       -1     
  Lines       38367    38356      -11     
==========================================
- Hits         8135     8114      -21     
- Misses      29477    29488      +11     
+ Partials      755      754       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[qwerty287]

I'm not that sure about this change. Yes, the BoolTrue logic is weird, but using it is quite easy as you just do b.Bool(). Now you have to do !b.Has() || b.Value(). This is quite error-prone I think, it's likely you forget something at some point, esp. the Has(). What would be better would be something like b.ValueWithDefault(true) so it returns true if it's not set.

[6543]

if it's about the lib being external we can just copy it into wp

[qwerty287]

No, that's not my problem. I just don't like the syntax. If you would have a func ValueWithDefault(true) that returns true if the value isn't set that would be fine for me.

[6543]

No, that's not my problem. I just don't like the syntax. If you would have a func ValueWithDefault(true) that returns true if the value isn't set that would be fine for me.

hah nice we come up with the same idea ... was just going to suggest that to you :)

[6543]

done

[6543]

imported

[qwerty287]

Linter fails but otherwise lgtm