-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.5k
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
DROOLS-7475 Proposed feature for ['key'] accessor #5333
DROOLS-7475 Proposed feature for ['key'] accessor #5333
Conversation
see also kiegroup/drools-ansible-rulebook-integration#56 (comment) make IndexableExpression interface so downstream can leverage this rather than specific concrete class
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the PR 👍
Function1<PrototypeFact, Object> extractor = getFieldValueExtractor(prototype, fieldName); | ||
|
||
String otherFieldName = ((PrototypeExpression.PrototypeFieldValue) right).getFieldName(); | ||
Function1<PrototypeFact, Object> otherExtractor = getFieldValueExtractor(otherPrototype, otherFieldName); | ||
Function1<PrototypeFact, Object> extractor = left.asFunction(prototype); | ||
Function1<PrototypeFact, Object> otherExtractor = right.asFunction(otherPrototype); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@mariofusco
I see you did this change, are you sure the two versions of the code are the same? getFieldValueExtractor
uses fieldName
while asFunction
not so it is not clear to me if they are equivalent
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I tested that they're equivalent, or in other words I ran the whole ansible integration test suite with this change only and everything was ok. In all honesty I tried to remember why I developed and went through that getFieldValueExtractor
method instead of using asFunction
directly but I couldn't :(
SonarCloud Quality Gate failed. 3 Bugs 91.3% Coverage Catch issues before they fail your Quality Gate with our IDE extension SonarLint |
I believe the (allegedly) failed sonarcloud report is wrong: 🤌 🤷 |
work-in-progress as i'm volunteering to work on this e2e, so this is a quite-complete draft for the ansible-rulebook side; i'll keep posted as i will progress on drools-ansible-rulebook-integration side. EDIT: demonstrate working locally and added e2e test as requested **JIRA**: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-7475 **referenced Pull Requests**: * #539 * ansible/drools_jpy#50 * kiegroup/drools-ansible-rulebook-integration#56 * https://github.com/kiegroup/drools/pull/5333 * https://issues.redhat.com/browse/AAP-10738 * kiegroup/drools-ansible-rulebook-integration#65 * ansible/drools_jpy#51 --------- Co-authored-by: Madhu Kanoor <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Alex <[email protected]>
see also kiegroup/drools-ansible-rulebook-integration#56 (comment)
make IndexableExpression interface so downstream can leverage this rather than specific concrete class
JIRA: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-7475
referenced Pull Requests:
How to replicate CI configuration locally?
Build Chain tool does "simple" maven build(s), the builds are just Maven commands, but because the repositories relates and depends on each other and any change in API or class method could affect several of those repositories there is a need to use build-chain tool to handle cross repository builds and be sure that we always use latest version of the code for each repository.
build-chain tool is a build tool which can be used on command line locally or in Github Actions workflow(s), in case you need to change multiple repositories and send multiple dependent pull requests related with a change you can easily reproduce the same build by executing it on Github hosted environment or locally in your development environment. See local execution details to get more information about it.
How to retest this PR or trigger a specific build:
for pull request checks
Please add comment: Jenkins retest this
for a specific pull request check
Please add comment: Jenkins (re)run [drools|kogito-runtimes|kogito-apps|kogito-examples] tests
for a full downstream build
run_fdb
a compile downstream build please add comment: Jenkins run cdb
a full production downstream build please add comment: Jenkins execute product fdb
an upstream build please add comment: Jenkins run upstream
for quarkus branch checks
Run checks against Quarkus current used branch
Please add comment: Jenkins run quarkus-branch
for a quarkus branch specific check
Run checks against Quarkus current used branch
Please add comment: Jenkins (re)run [drools|kogito-runtimes|kogito-apps|kogito-examples] quarkus-branch
for quarkus main checks
Run checks against Quarkus main branch
Please add comment: Jenkins run quarkus-main
for a specific quarkus main check
Run checks against Quarkus main branch
Please add comment: Jenkins (re)run [drools|kogito-runtimes|kogito-apps|kogito-examples] quarkus-main
for quarkus lts checks
Run checks against Quarkus lts branch
Please add comment: Jenkins run quarkus-lts
for a specific quarkus lts check
Run checks against Quarkus lts branch
Please add comment: Jenkins (re)run [drools|kogito-runtimes|kogito-apps|kogito-examples] quarkus-lts
for native checks
Run native checks
Please add comment: Jenkins run native
for a specific native check
Run native checks
Please add comment: Jenkins (re)run [drools|kogito-runtimes|kogito-apps|kogito-examples] native
for native lts checks
Run native checks against quarkus lts branch
Please add comment: Jenkins run native-lts
for a specific native lts check
Run native checks against quarkus lts branch
Please add comment: Jenkins (re)run [drools|kogito-runtimes|kogito-apps|kogito-examples] native-lts
How to backport a pull request to a different branch?
In order to automatically create a backporting pull request please add one or more labels having the following format
backport-<branch-name>
, where<branch-name>
is the name of the branch where the pull request must be backported to (e.g.,backport-7.67.x
to backport the original PR to the7.67.x
branch).Once the original pull request is successfully merged, the automated action will create one backporting pull request per each label (with the previous format) that has been added.
If something goes wrong, the author will be notified and at this point a manual backporting is needed.