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

feat(processWorker): create process worker package #998

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Phil91
Copy link
Member

@Phil91 Phil91 commented Sep 16, 2024

Description

  • create packages for the process worker library
  • adjusting code to use the new library

Why

To provide the process worker functionality to other products as well

Issue

#240

Checklist

  • I have followed the contributing guidelines
  • I have performed IP checks for added or updated 3rd party libraries
  • I have created and linked IP issues or requested their creation by a committer
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have successfully tested my changes locally
  • I have added tests that prove my changes work
  • I have checked that new and existing tests pass locally with my changes
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas

@Phil91 Phil91 requested a review from ntruchsess September 16, 2024 10:39
@Phil91 Phil91 force-pushed the process-worker branch 2 times, most recently from c37c866 to 277d39f Compare September 17, 2024 12:58
@Phil91 Phil91 force-pushed the process-worker branch 2 times, most recently from a33c0d3 to 4873665 Compare September 27, 2024 14:00
@Phil91 Phil91 marked this pull request as ready for review September 27, 2024 14:00
@Phil91 Phil91 force-pushed the process-worker branch 4 times, most recently from b6cdc0d to 365e03c Compare October 4, 2024 09:47
@evegufy evegufy added this to the Release 25.03 milestone Oct 24, 2024
@Phil91 Phil91 force-pushed the process-worker branch 2 times, most recently from 0823f7d to 8f3b6bd Compare November 13, 2024 15:01
typecastcloud
typecastcloud previously approved these changes Jan 7, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@typecastcloud typecastcloud left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As far as I can see everything works like before and my tests succeeded.

Some code changes were reviewed by me (not 13k) and look fine. Please test jobs after deployment.

Copy link
Contributor

@ntruchsess ntruchsess left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Generaly speaking as c# inheritance is limited to a single base-type it is not advisable to mandatory enforce inheritance from a framework type. Instead interfaces should be used.
In respect to EF using concrete entity-types and dbcontext base class defines hardcoded table-names that cannot be adjusted by the framework-using code. It implies an application cannot have more than a single process/process-step table within a given db-schema. In addition to that it also disallows to define any other custom base-class for the dbcontext.
Instead the framework should define interfaces to be implemented by the concrete entities (Process, ProcessStep and ProcessStepStatus) and those interfaces should be used within the framework code.
Concrete Entity-classes implementing those interfaces and dbcontext base class may still be provided (in a separate implementation package) but the use of those should be optional.

Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Jan 20, 2025

Quality Gate Passed Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
28 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.3% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: IN PROGRESS
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants