This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 9, 2020. It is now read-only.
status: Accommodate new verify systems #1951
Merged
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
The implementation of status could probably be considerably trimmed down now, as a number of the things it was doing can be done by new logic in gps/verify. This does the bare minimum necessary to get templated output working.
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What does this do / why do we need it?
Updates
dep statusto be aware of the new logic related to verification introduced in #1912. Note that, with the introduction ofdep checkin #1929, i think it's probably fine to gradually scale back the responsibilities ofdep statusto things thatdep checkdoesn't do - like upstream state checks.The implementation of status could probably be considerably trimmed down
now, as a number of the things it was doing can be done by new logic in
gps/verify. This PR is mostly just the bare minimum necessary to get templated output
working.
What should your reviewer look out for in this PR?
General correctness, ofc; also, i think there's probably holes where the general reporting about things being out of sync are.
Do you need help or clarification on anything?
nah
Which issue(s) does this PR fix?
fixes #1936