HYPERFLEET-645 - fix: Change owned_reference to owner_references#13
Conversation
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review infoConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
WalkthroughTwo unrelated, small changes: (1) In the example cloud event JSON for NodePool, the field Estimated code review effort🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In @.claude/settings.local.json:
- Around line 1-10: The .claude/settings.local.json file was accidentally
committed and should be removed from the PR; either delete the file from the
branch or add the .claude/ directory to .gitignore and stop tracking the file so
local settings aren’t committed in future; specifically update .gitignore to
include ".claude/" (or remove the single file entry) and ensure
.claude/settings.local.json is removed from the commit history/index so it no
longer appears in the diff.
Mischulee
force-pushed
the
HYPERFLEET-645
branch
from
f8fc4e9 to
1f0d58c
Compare
Mischulee
force-pushed
the
HYPERFLEET-645
branch
from
1f0d58c to
96dba80
Compare
|
/retest |
| "href": "https://api.hyperfleet.com/v1/clusters/11111111-1111-1111-1111-111111111111/nodepools/22222222-2222-2222-2222-222222222222", | ||
| "generation": 5, | ||
| "owned_reference": { | ||
| "owner_references": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey, I noticed that the https://github.com/openshift-hyperfleet/architecture/blob/main/hyperfleet/components/broker/asyncapi.yaml defines this field as owned_reference (singular) — it's listed as a required field in the ReconcileNodePool schema.
If the actual API returns owner_references, then we should also update the AsyncAPI spec to
stay in sync. Otherwise we'll have the example saying one thing and the spec saying another,
which is the same kind of inconsistency this PR is trying to fix.
Could we confirm against the real API response and, if needed, open a follow-up to update the
spec?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We confirmed the API uses owner_references in https://github.com/openshift-hyperfleet/hyperfleet-api-spec/blob/main/models/nodepools/model.tsp#L50.
Follow-up PRs were merged - updated the AsyncAPI spec, adapter code, and docs to match. Everything is now consistent.
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: rafabene The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
openshift-merge-bot
bot
merged commit 024ec6b
into
openshift-hyperfleet:main
2 participants
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/HYPERFLEET-645
Summary by CodeRabbit
Documentation
Chores