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.

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

Jump to bottom

fix(#9963): Add logic to handle for f.Close() for util/db #10127

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 28, 2022
Merged

fix(#9963): Add logic to handle for f.Close() for util/db #10127

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 28, 2022

Conversation

my-git9
Copy link
Member

@my-git9 my-git9 commented Jul 28, 2022 •
edited
Loading

the link issue: #9963

Add logic to handle for f.Close() for util/db

Checklist:

  • Either (a) I've created an enhancement proposal and discussed it with the community, (b) this is a bug fix, or (c) this does not need to be in the release notes.
  • The title of the PR states what changed and the related issues number (used for the release note).
  • I've included "Closes [ISSUE #]" or "Fixes [ISSUE #]" in the description to automatically close the associated issue.
  • I've updated both the CLI and UI to expose my feature, or I plan to submit a second PR with them.
  • Does this PR require documentation updates?
  • I've updated documentation as required by this PR.
  • Optional. My organization is added to USERS.md.
  • I have signed off all my commits as required by DCO
  • I have written unit and/or e2e tests for my change. PRs without these are unlikely to be merged.
  • My build is green (troubleshooting builds).

@my-git9
Add logic to handle for f.Close() for util/db
f77be6c 
Signed-off-by: xin.li <xin.li@daocloud.io>
crenshaw-dev
crenshaw-dev approved these changes Jul 28, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@crenshaw-dev crenshaw-dev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm!

Looks like there are going to be quite a few changes. Can they be consolidated at all so there are fewer reviews/commits? Not a big deal, just might make for a nicer git history and easier review process.

@crenshaw-dev crenshaw-dev enabled auto-merge (squash) July 28, 2022 14:23
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 28, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #10127 (f77be6c) into master (e3940cd) will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 50.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #10127      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   45.88%   45.88%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         227      227              
  Lines       27373    27376       +3     
==========================================
+ Hits        12560    12561       +1     
- Misses      13109    13110       +1     
- Partials     1704     1705       +1
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
util/db/gpgkeys.go 77.14% <50.00%> (-1.97%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update e3940cd...f77be6c. Read the comment docs.

@crenshaw-dev crenshaw-dev merged commit 85b4dc3 into argoproj:master Jul 28, 2022
@my-git9
Copy link
Member Author

my-git9 commented Jul 28, 2022

lgtm!

Looks like there are going to be quite a few changes. Can they be consolidated at all so there are fewer reviews/commits? Not a big deal, just might make for a nicer git history and easier review process.

Sorry, because I am not skilled at this, I hope the review will be smoother, so I divided it into multiple times, I will pay attention to it later

@crenshaw-dev
Copy link
Member

Sorry, because I am not skilled at this, I hope the review will be smoother, so I divided it into multiple times, I will pay attention to it later

No worries! Honestly, do whatever is easiest for you, you're putting a lot of effort into these! Just know that large-ish PRs are fine by me if you want to go that route. :-)

@my-git9
Copy link
Member Author

my-git9 commented Jul 29, 2022

Sorry, because I am not skilled at this, I hope the review will be smoother, so I divided it into multiple times, I will pay attention to it later

No worries! Honestly, do whatever is easiest for you, you're putting a lot of effort into these! Just know that large-ish PRs are fine by me if you want to go that route. :-)

Thanks

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@crenshaw-dev crenshaw-dev crenshaw-dev approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@my-git9 @crenshaw-dev