Generate an integrations package from a release #983
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
brokensound77
commented
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
| UUID_PATTERN = r'[0-9a-f]{8}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{12}' | ||
|
|
||
| _version = r'\d+\.\d+(\.\d+[\w-]*)*' | ||
| CONDITION_VERSION_PATTERN = rf'^\^{_version}$' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i think we'll loosen this up as we go. might move from ^ to ~ or something.
no changes needed here, just an fyi
There was a problem hiding this comment.
good to know - can always expand it here
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 5, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 8, 2021
| """Initialize a package.""" | ||
| self.rules: List[Rule] = [r.copy() for r in rules] | ||
| self.rules = [r.copy() for r in rules] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like type inspection has figured it out. I think we could annotate the Rule.copy method to explicitly mention a return type of Rule, but PyCharm at least is pretty smart
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 8, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 8, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 8, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 8, 2021
|
|
||
| assert self.registry_data | ||
|
|
||
| manifest = RegistryPackageManifest.from_dict(self.registry_data) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it would make more sense to give this class an already assembled RegistryPackageManifest, but we can do this later with a restructur
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 8, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 8, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 8, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 8, 2021
threat-punter
force-pushed
the
generate-oob-package
branch
from
10c6cbe
to
4117d74
Compare
threat-punter
approved these changes
Mar 9, 2021
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice one, @brokensound77. I left one comment for your review. LGTM!
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 9, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 9, 2021
rw-access
reviewed
Mar 9, 2021
rw-access
approved these changes
Mar 9, 2021
3 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Issues
related to elastic/package-storage#843
Summary
This generates a package in the format expected by
package-storagefor use with the integrations process. The package is generated along with the other artifacts fromPackagingand can be built withmake releaseordev build-release.To see this with WIP changelog code along with more comprehensive changes, refer to this diff.
To see the package built with this PR, refer to the checks