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

Define API structures for evaluation history #3647

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 28, 2024
Merged

Define API structures for evaluation history #3647

merged 2 commits into from
Jun 28, 2024

Conversation

dmjb
Copy link
Contributor

@dmjb dmjb commented Jun 18, 2024

Summary

This contains the message body definitions as protobufs for the evaluation history endpoints. The endpoint is just a stub enabled via feature flag.

Fixes #3558

Change Type

Mark the type of change your PR introduces:

  • Bug fix (resolves an issue without affecting existing features)
  • Feature (adds new functionality without breaking changes)
  • Breaking change (may impact existing functionalities or require documentation updates)
  • Documentation (updates or additions to documentation)
  • Refactoring or test improvements (no bug fixes or new functionality)

Testing

Outline how the changes were tested, including steps to reproduce and any relevant configurations.
Attach screenshots if helpful.

Review Checklist:

  • Reviewed my own code for quality and clarity.
  • Added comments to complex or tricky code sections.
  • Updated any affected documentation.
  • Included tests that validate the fix or feature.
  • Checked that related changes are merged.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

coverage: 53.301% (+0.005%) from 53.296%
when pulling 23e1da1 on history-proto-defs
into 67208c5 on main.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

coverage: 53.31% (+0.01%) from 53.296%
when pulling c3b8536 on history-proto-defs
into 67208c5 on main.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

coverage: 52.384% (-0.03%) from 52.412%
when pulling 00ba4d3 on history-proto-defs
into 53fe30a on main.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

coverage: 52.374% (-0.04%) from 52.412%
when pulling bb0242a on history-proto-defs
into 53fe30a on main.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

coverage: 52.428% (-0.04%) from 52.466%
when pulling 7cf471e on history-proto-defs
into cae4b26 on main.

@blkt blkt force-pushed the history-proto-defs branch 2 times, most recently from 6a89b3f to 33be5ea Compare June 26, 2024 15:13
@blkt blkt self-assigned this Jun 26, 2024
@blkt blkt marked this pull request as ready for review June 26, 2024 15:16
@blkt blkt requested a review from a team as a code owner June 26, 2024 15:16
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

coverage: 52.437% (-0.05%) from 52.487%
when pulling 33be5ea on history-proto-defs
into 1b8a332 on main.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

coverage: 52.428% (-0.06%) from 52.487%
when pulling 33be5ea on history-proto-defs
into 1b8a332 on main.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

coverage: 52.428% (-0.06%) from 52.487%
when pulling c584179 on history-proto-defs
into 1b8a332 on main.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

coverage: 52.428% (-0.06%) from 52.487%
when pulling 02b390a on history-proto-defs
into cdb5ae7 on main.

dmjb and others added 2 commits June 27, 2024 15:16
This contains the message body definitions as protobufs for the
evaluation history endpoints. The endpoints themselves are not defined
yet since we want to figure out how pagination will work.
As part of this development, a Cursor message was added to implement
pagination.
EvaluationHistoryRemediation remediation = 5;
}

message EvaluationHistoryEntity {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since these messages are only used inside EvaluationHistory, have you considered defining them there? (You could still access them outside with a qualified name, see https://protobuf.dev/programming-guides/proto3/#nested)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I like the idea but don't fully grasp all implications.
Those messages are not yet used in the application, I would move them in a separate PR.

Copy link
Contributor

@jhrozek jhrozek left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I added a single comment, but overall LGTM

@blkt blkt merged commit d045d12 into main Jun 28, 2024
22 checks passed
@blkt blkt deleted the history-proto-defs branch June 28, 2024 08:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Define API structures for evaluation history
4 participants