Repository navigation
fix(compute): gate shared operation types behind per-service features #6312
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
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
This list would need to change every time the generator creates a new feature that enables LROs. That happens automatically, several times a year. We don't want to have to manually edit these files each time.
Ideally, we change the code generator to emit a hidden feature that represents "we need the operation types" and the generator enables that feature when any feature that needs it is enabled. Then this code can be changed once.
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.
this makes sense long term. I looked into the generator and it already tracks which types are used for long-running
operations, so adding a hidden feature that other features can depend
on looks doable without too much trouble, and it would help the other crates with the same pattern too.
since that change lives in the generator repo, would it be okay to merge this as the immediate fix for the critical build breakage, while open an issue there for the hidden-feature. once that's implemented, I'll follow up here to switch the fix over.
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.
Hmm... I see this was labeled "critical", but I don't understand why. @dbolduc
Frankly I would rather not put this fix in. It creates a maintenance headache, and the workaround for anybody affected by the bug is to enable any feature (say
zone-operations) that fixes the build.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 agree that we should not hard code this list (even temporarily). I added a comment to the bug and this also affects builds of certain feature flags (like accelerator-types) which would need to be excluded from these lists.
It is possible we are able to do this feature gating for the whole module instead and can then just put it in the generated code and avoid the hidden feature part of this entirely.