V2 create basic structure #671 #682
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Janine Olear <pninak@web.de>
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #682 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 93.90% 92.11% -1.79%
==========================================
Files 9 9
Lines 410 482 +72
Branches 88 102 +14
==========================================
+ Hits 385 444 +59
- Misses 13 20 +7
- Partials 12 18 +6
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Signed-off-by: Janine Olear <pninak@web.de>
miyunari
force-pushed
the
v2_create_basic_structure_#671
branch
from
2ea5c05
to
5e3f76d
Compare
Signed-off-by: Janine Olear <pninak@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Janine Olear <pninak@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Janine Olear <pninak@web.de>
miyunari
force-pushed
the
v2_create_basic_structure_#671
branch
from
43e3931
to
6088c9f
Compare
| filename = entry.filename.split("/") | ||
| if len(filename) < 3: | ||
| print("warn: could not determine region or provider of image: " + entry.filename) | ||
| continue | ||
|
|
||
| entry.content["provider"] = filename[1] | ||
| entry.content["region"] = filename[2] | ||
| entry.content["provider"] = filename[4] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is totally fine but I can imagine that these array access values might be confusing in the long run. Maybe we can use namedtuples in the future? It would at least make accessing the individual fields easier.
Just an example:
from collections import namedtuple
APIPath = namedtuple('APIPath', ['api_version', 'distro', 'provider', 'version','region','image_id'])
split_path = "v2/rhel/google/9.0.0/us-east-1/asdasdasdadaf".split('/')
api_path = APIPath(*split_path)
print(api_path.api_version)
print(api_path.image_id)
That api_path could be a property of the DataEntry object or something.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree, that looks way better to maintain. 😄 Is it ok, when I adapt this in another pr? :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I created a new issue for it :) #685
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Absolutely, thanks for taking care of this.
closes #671