Skip to content

feature: add from first reference to ResourceID too #846

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 19, 2022
Merged

feature: add from first reference to ResourceID too #846

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
0a2c5bf
feature: add from first reference to resourceID too
csviri Jan 18, 2022
53f97c2
fix: null check
csviri Jan 18, 2022
4039478
fix: revert :/
csviri Jan 18, 2022
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
10 changes: 10 additions & 0 deletions ...framework-core/src/main/java/io/javaoperatorsdk/operator/processing/event/ResourceID.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -13,6 +13,16 @@ public static ResourceID fromResource(HasMetadata resource) {
resource.getMetadata().getNamespace());
}

public static Optional<ResourceID> fromFirstOwnerReference(HasMetadata resource) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would still put this method on the Mappers class because it's not easily findable here, imo.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@csviri csviri Jan 19, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Based on the current situation it would fit also there. But ResourceID already has fromResource static initializer. A lean usually to have those methods directly in the class, basically an utility class is always harder to find (actually already a problem if there is need to search for it).
Currently Mapper contains static init methods for PrimaryResourceRetriever, these might be also directly on that interface, so its obviouse how to create them and not search for Mappers.

So I kinda lean towards this, to have it as it is now. If you insist we can move it however, ok with that too.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah yes, and the method doesn't have the same exact semantics so yes, it makes kind of sense to keep it on ResourceID. Diff reviews sometimes make you miss context… 🤦🏼

var ownerReferences = resource.getMetadata().getOwnerReferences();
if (!ownerReferences.isEmpty()) {
return Optional.of(new ResourceID(ownerReferences.get(0).getName(),
resource.getMetadata().getNamespace()));
} else {
return Optional.empty();
}
}

private final String name;
private final String namespace;

Expand Down
11 changes: 2 additions & 9 deletions ...e/src/main/java/io/javaoperatorsdk/operator/processing/event/source/informer/Mappers.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -30,15 +30,8 @@ public static <T extends HasMetadata> PrimaryResourcesRetriever<T> fromLabel(
}

public static <T extends HasMetadata> PrimaryResourcesRetriever<T> fromOwnerReference() {
return resource -> {
var ownerReferences = resource.getMetadata().getOwnerReferences();
if (!ownerReferences.isEmpty()) {
return Set.of(new ResourceID(ownerReferences.get(0).getName(),
resource.getMetadata().getNamespace()));
} else {
return Collections.emptySet();
}
};
return resource -> ResourceID.fromFirstOwnerReference(resource).map(Set::of)
.orElse(Collections.emptySet());
}

private static <T extends HasMetadata> PrimaryResourcesRetriever<T> fromMetadata(
Expand Down