Revert Refactor of BundleReferenceStrategy into Bundle
#4187
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
|
close/reopen to get CI unstuck: |
Zac-HD
approved these changes
Nov 29, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Gah. I should have caught the original PR in review, I guess 😞
Thanks very much @reaganjlee for digging in again and handling the revert!
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
After reviewing, closes #4181, I realize there isn't a really "hypothesis-like" way to differentiate between the
Bundlecalls from the internalrun_state_machineand those from other strategies, so the best way to solve this seems to be to revert most of it (there's two areas about printing but it didn't seem to affect the tests, so leaving that in). Hopefully it wasn't too much trouble for the users! At the very least there's some improvement in the testbase.I'll also have to do a bit of refactor #4084 but I think that'll be fine.
Original PR: #4124