develop ff-python based on ofn v1beta2 #3
Conversation
Signed-off-by: laminar <[email protected]>
tpiperatgod
changed the title
Signed-off-by: laminar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: laminar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: laminar <[email protected]>
|
That's great, looking forward to this PR! @wanjunlei @wrongerror |
Signed-off-by: laminar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: laminar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: laminar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: laminar <[email protected]>
|
I think this PR is ready for review, as it currently supports Dapr and HTTP triggers. (can be demonstrated in the sig meeting) The observability feature and the hooks feature can be worked on later. What are your comments? |
tpiperatgod
changed the title
|
@tpiperatgod That's great. @wanjunlei @wrongerror @webup @lizzzcai would you help to review? |
benjaminhuo
requested review from
lizzzcai and
kehuili
and removed request for
kehuili
| return self.__http_request | ||
|
|
||
| @exception_handler | ||
| def send(self, output_name, data): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Now we do not encourage users to call send now. Instead, we suggest invoking dapr method directly using daprClient like this https://github.com/OpenFunction/java-samples/blob/main/src/main/java/dev/openfunction/samples/StateStore.java#L72
invokeBindings for the binding component
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see. Should we remove send() or keep it for now?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can keep it for now, but can user get daprClient from function's context now?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
UserContext has the self.dapr_client
There was a problem hiding this comment.
UserContext has the
self.dapr_client
Then we need samples to call dapr client directly
|
I'm okay with this PR, and it's great to have this significant improvement to the Python framework. |
|
any changes from the user side? maybe can update the docs if any. |
I'll update the docs and examples later |
| @@ -0,0 +1,217 @@ | |||
| # Copyright 2020 Google LLC | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this should be updated as well?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I kept some of gcp's license header because almost all of that code comes from gcp's ff-python, what do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
in this case, I think can keep it. maybe @benjaminhuo can comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Keep it if we haven't modify it
Signed-off-by: laminar <[email protected]>
No description provided.