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.

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

cli: improve output of eval commands #13581

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jul 7, 2022
Merged

cli: improve output of eval commands #13581

merged 4 commits into from
Jul 7, 2022

Conversation

lgfa29
Copy link
Contributor

@lgfa29 lgfa29 commented Jul 5, 2022

Use the same output format when listing multiple evals in the eval list command and when eval status <prefix> matches more than one
eval.

Include the eval namespace in all output formats and always include the
job ID in eval status since, even node-update evals are related to a
job.

Add Node ID to the evals table output to help differentiate
node-update evals.

Use the same output format when listing multiple evals in the `eval
list` command and when `eval status <prefix>` matches more than one
eval.

Include the eval namespace in all output formats and always include the
job ID in `eval status` since, even `node-update` evals are related to a
job.

Add Node ID to the evals table output to help differentiate
`node-update` evals.
Copy link
Member

@jrasell jrasell left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

I pushed two additional commits to this PR which should be checked before merging. The first was merging main into the branch in order to fix a merge conflict. The second was to move eval delete to use this listing helper and update the docs for this accordingly.

@lgfa29
Copy link
Contributor Author

lgfa29 commented Jul 7, 2022

The changes look good, thanks!

@lgfa29 lgfa29 merged commit 52389ff into main Jul 7, 2022
@lgfa29 lgfa29 deleted the f-improve-eval-cli-output branch July 7, 2022 17:13
lgfa29 added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 7, 2022
Use the same output format when listing multiple evals in the `eval
list` command and when `eval status <prefix>` matches more than one
eval.

Include the eval namespace in all output formats and always include the
job ID in `eval status` since, even `node-update` evals are related to a
job.

Add Node ID to the evals table output to help differentiate
`node-update` evals.

Co-authored-by: James Rasell <jrasell@hashicorp.com>
lgfa29 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 8, 2022
Use the same output format when listing multiple evals in the `eval
list` command and when `eval status <prefix>` matches more than one
eval.

Include the eval namespace in all output formats and always include the
job ID in `eval status` since, even `node-update` evals are related to a
job.

Add Node ID to the evals table output to help differentiate
`node-update` evals.

Co-authored-by: James Rasell <jrasell@hashicorp.com>
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Nov 5, 2022

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 120 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 5, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
backport/1.3.x backport to 1.3.x release line
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants