You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The TL;DR version is that the format where nested keys are references (for overwriting in this case) in one key with dots instead of a nested mapping, isn't being "broken down" correctly in some cases.
What's interesting is to see that there are TWO composite keys insimple_grpc_service.yaml, runner.grpc and then implementation.class_name and while the latter, resolves correctly into a nested implementation and class_name, the former remains a single key runner.grpc and thus the intended overwriting of class_name under runner / grpc / implementation does not happen.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The TL;DR version is that the format where nested keys are references (for overwriting in this case) in one key with dots instead of a nested mapping, isn't being "broken down" correctly in some cases.
The example here goes something like this:
First we have defaults.yaml:
Then simple_grpc_service.yaml:
And this should result in:
But instead this happens:
What's interesting is to see that there are TWO composite keys insimple_grpc_service.yaml,
runner.grpc
and thenimplementation.class_name
and while the latter, resolves correctly into a nestedimplementation
andclass_name
, the former remains a single keyrunner.grpc
and thus the intended overwriting ofclass_name
underrunner
/grpc
/implementation
does not happen.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: