-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 532
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
improvement(client): deprecation cleanup #22948
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
For `merge-tree` and `sequence` packages, setup as many internal only types/values without compromising continued support for deprecated API use by customers.
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 Summary
↓ packages.dds.sequence.src.intervals:
Line Coverage Change: -0.79% Branch Coverage Change: -0.16%
Metric Name | Baseline coverage | PR coverage | Coverage Diff |
---|---|---|---|
Branch Coverage | 89.47% | 89.31% | ↓ -0.16% |
Line Coverage | 96.22% | 95.43% | ↓ -0.79% |
↓ packages.dds.sequence.src:
Line Coverage Change: 0.12% Branch Coverage Change: -0.44%
Metric Name | Baseline coverage | PR coverage | Coverage Diff |
---|---|---|---|
Branch Coverage | 89.47% | 89.03% | ↓ -0.44% |
Line Coverage | 89.74% | 89.86% | ↑ 0.12% |
↓ packages.dds.merge-tree.src:
Line Coverage Change: -0.02% Branch Coverage Change: No change
Metric Name | Baseline coverage | PR coverage | Coverage Diff |
---|---|---|---|
Branch Coverage | 94.90% | 94.90% | → No change |
Line Coverage | 97.08% | 97.06% | ↓ -0.02% |
↑ packages.dds.sequence.src.intervalIndex:
Line Coverage Change: 0.01% Branch Coverage Change: No change
Metric Name | Baseline coverage | PR coverage | Coverage Diff |
---|---|---|---|
Branch Coverage | 92.55% | 92.55% | → No change |
Line Coverage | 87.31% | 87.32% | ↑ 0.01% |
Baseline commit: 522f76f
Baseline build: 303346
Happy Coding!!
Code coverage comparison check passed!!
Why did you create another PR which is the same as the PR i already have in progress: #22696 |
readonly opArgs: IMergeTreeDeltaOpArgs | undefined; | ||
} | ||
|
||
// @alpha (undocumented) | ||
export const SequenceMaintenanceEvent: { |
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.
this should not be exported
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.
at a minimum you've lost the deprecation, i'm also not sure if this is technically non-breaking in all cases. i'd rather just keep the pattern i've already got
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'd rather go with the PR i have. i don't see any particular advantage to this approach, it just seems like a highly opinionated redo of #22696
@@ -1234,7 +1310,7 @@ export class MergeTree { | |||
const deltaSegments: IMergeTreeSegmentDelta[] = []; | |||
const overlappingRemoves: boolean[] = []; | |||
pendingSegmentGroup.segments.map((pendingSegment: ISegmentLeaf) => { | |||
const overlappingRemove = !pendingSegment.ack(pendingSegmentGroup, opArgs); | |||
const overlappingRemove = !ackSegment(pendingSegment, pendingSegmentGroup, opArgs); |
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 didn't do this initially on purpose, as there was/is active development in the area, and i'm trying to not clobber other people's work
For
merge-tree
andsequence
packages, setup as many internal only types/values without compromising continued support for deprecated API use by customers.