Skip to content

Conversation

NotTheEvilOne
Copy link
Contributor

@NotTheEvilOne NotTheEvilOne commented Aug 20, 2025

What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR adds support to read metadata, especially feature sets and platforms, without parsing data from the features directory.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #154
Fixes gardenlinux/gardenlinux#3244
Related gardenlinux/gardenlinux#3243

Special notes for your reviewer:
This PR will be tagged 0.9.2. Please be aware that the metadata is subject to change.

I would like to suggest that @nkraetzschmar and I discuss the opportunity to extend and define a common "metadata" file to replace or extend files like *.release, *.requirements and the S3 metadata file.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 20, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 67.81116% with 75 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 86.58%. Comparing base (8d6fb94) to head (447dacd).
⚠️ Report is 8 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/gardenlinux/features/__main__.py 40.29% 40 Missing ⚠️
src/gardenlinux/features/cname.py 70.52% 28 Missing ⚠️
src/gardenlinux/features/parser.py 81.25% 6 Missing ⚠️
src/gardenlinux/features/metadata_main.py 96.55% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #172      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.06%   86.58%   -2.48%     
==========================================
  Files          33       34       +1     
  Lines        1500     1648     +148     
==========================================
+ Hits         1336     1427      +91     
- Misses        164      221      +57     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@NotTheEvilOne NotTheEvilOne force-pushed the feature/metadata-file-support branch from 4d38553 to 5fa173a Compare September 4, 2025 17:13
@NotTheEvilOne
Copy link
Contributor Author

After discussion with @nkraetzschmar we decided to go with the os_release file and metadata for this feature as initial implementation. I'll adjust method names and functionality to reflect that.

@NotTheEvilOne NotTheEvilOne force-pushed the feature/metadata-file-support branch from 5fa173a to 133a105 Compare September 29, 2025 07:19
@NotTheEvilOne NotTheEvilOne force-pushed the feature/metadata-file-support branch 9 times, most recently from 4a1156e to 5ed0559 Compare September 30, 2025 13:12
@NotTheEvilOne NotTheEvilOne marked this pull request as ready for review October 1, 2025 08:44
@NotTheEvilOne NotTheEvilOne modified the milestones: 2025-08, 2025-10 Oct 1, 2025
@NotTheEvilOne NotTheEvilOne force-pushed the feature/metadata-file-support branch from 5ed0559 to 447dacd Compare October 1, 2025 10:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

De-couple testing and publishing logic from features directory Properly resolve platforms given a cname
1 participant