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

feat: Change fractional custom op from percentage-based to relative weighting. #828 #833

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jun 27, 2024
Merged

feat: Change fractional custom op from percentage-based to relative weighting. #828 #833

merged 5 commits into from
Jun 27, 2024

Conversation

aepfli
Copy link
Member

@aepfli aepfli commented Jun 19, 2024

Related Issues

Fixes #828

@aepfli aepfli requested a review from a team as a code owner June 19, 2024 11:45
@aepfli
Copy link
Member Author

aepfli commented Jun 19, 2024

i am not sure that my change caused the ci to fail. maybe i misread the log, but could some body of the maintainers restart the build

@aepfli aepfli force-pushed the issue/828_fractional_relative_weighting branch from 68f77f8 to 8f8e93f Compare June 19, 2024 12:30
@aepfli
feat: Change fractional custom op from percentage-based to relative w…
ddbcc84 
…eighting. open-feature#828

Signed-off-by: Simon Schrottner <simon.schrottner@dynatrace.com>
@aepfli aepfli force-pushed the issue/828_fractional_relative_weighting branch from 8f8e93f to ddbcc84 Compare June 19, 2024 13:35
@aepfli
Copy link
Member Author

aepfli commented Jun 19, 2024

okay i am realizing that the e2e tests are failing, i need to investigate, what might be the issue - do i maybe need to update some dependencies - or do you see an error in my implementation?

@toddbaert
Copy link
Member

okay i am realizing that the e2e tests are failing, i need to investigate, what might be the issue - do i maybe need to update some dependencies - or do you see an error in my implementation?

I'll try to debug locally and see. It's possible you are just very unlucky though and this is unrelated, because the assert that's failing doesn't seem to do with fractional at all... but these tests are usually very reliable and not flacky so 🤷

I will re-run to double-check

@toddbaert
Copy link
Member

It's the assertion in the_provider_configuration_changed_handler_must_run. It is consistently failing. I'm surprised though, it doesn't really have to do with fractional.

@toddbaert
Copy link
Member

toddbaert commented Jun 19, 2024 •
edited
Loading

If you rebase on or merge main the e2e suite should work now.

See: #834

@aepfli
Merge branch 'main' into issue/828_fractional_relative_weighting
0ab0e71 
Signed-off-by: Simon Schrottner <simon.schrottner@dynatrace.com>
@aepfli aepfli force-pushed the issue/828_fractional_relative_weighting branch from 5cbf293 to 0ab0e71 Compare June 19, 2024 16:25
@aepfli
Copy link
Member Author

aepfli commented Jun 19, 2024

relates also to: open-feature/flagd#1282 - for tracking purpose in the main ticket

@Kavindu-Dodan Kavindu-Dodan added this to the flagd-0.8.4 milestone Jun 20, 2024
Kavindu-Dodan
Kavindu-Dodan approved these changes Jun 20, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@Kavindu-Dodan Kavindu-Dodan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Other than the nit, looks good 🙌

@aepfli @Kavindu-Dodan
Update providers/flagd/src/test/java/dev/openfeature/contrib/provider…
7665ad5 
…s/flagd/resolver/process/targeting/FractionalTest.java

Co-authored-by: Kavindu Dodanduwa <Kavindu-Dodan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Simon Schrottner <simon.schrottner@dynatrace.com>
thisthat
thisthat reviewed Jun 24, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@thisthat thisthat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM but I'd suggest to add the example reported in #828 for testing purpose to validate that if we have a 50/50 (or 25/25/25/25) it's equivalent to 1/1 (or 1/1/1/1)

@aepfli
add more test cases, and reduce boilerplate
fae24a6 
Signed-off-by: Simon Schrottner <simon.schrottner@dynatrace.com>
@aepfli
Copy link
Member Author

aepfli commented Jun 27, 2024

LGTM but I'd suggest to add the example reported in #828 for testing purpose to validate that if we have a 50/50 (or 25/25/25/25) it's equivalent to 1/1 (or 1/1/1/1)

@thisthat i modified the tests, and added some more, each test is now an own json file, with a rule and an expected result, this allows us to easier add test cases in the future - i hope this is fine.

thisthat
thisthat approved these changes Jun 27, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@thisthat thisthat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks a lot @aepfli :shipit:

@toddbaert toddbaert merged commit 2e5c146 into open-feature:main Jun 27, 2024
4 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Jun 27, 2024
Merged
@toddbaert toddbaert mentioned this pull request Oct 15, 2024
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@thisthat thisthat thisthat approved these changes

@Kavindu-Dodan Kavindu-Dodan Kavindu-Dodan approved these changes

@toddbaert toddbaert toddbaert approved these changes

@beeme1mr beeme1mr Awaiting requested review from beeme1mr

Assignees

@beeme1mr beeme1mr

@thisthat thisthat

@Kavindu-Dodan Kavindu-Dodan

@toddbaert toddbaert

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
flagd-0.8.4
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[FEATURE] Change fractional custom op from percentage-based to relative weighting.
5 participants
@aepfli @toddbaert @thisthat @Kavindu-Dodan @beeme1mr