-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 49
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[1.x] Allow retrieving all features for a scope when some features are defined for differing scopes #121
[1.x] Allow retrieving all features for a scope when some features are defined for differing scopes #121
Conversation
Thanks for submitting a PR! Note that draft PR's are not reviewed. If you would like a review, please mark your pull request as ready for review in the GitHub user interface. Pull requests that are abandoned in draft may be closed due to inactivity. |
5663d44
to
c89423f
Compare
Drafting pending review from @timacdonald |
8aa3338
to
503b8a4
Compare
503b8a4
to
ab01fed
Compare
@cosmastech, I have re-worked this one. There were a few problems with the original implementation. The main issue was when a value was resolved for a bad type, it was saved to the database. The new implementation does the check before attempting to resolve. Supports union and intersection types. What do you think?
|
Thanks for working on this @timacdonald. Sad you removed my given-when-then 😆 but otherwise, nice. I didn't run any local testing on this, but it seems to solve the problem. Good catch on the DB queries, didn't consider that fact. |
public function definedFeaturesForScope($scope) | ||
{ | ||
return collect($this->nameMap) | ||
->only($this->defined()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@timacdonald Unfortunately this doesn't work with 3rd party services like LaunchDarkly where the features are defined in their platform.
Any thoughts on adding a check before this to see the namedMap
is empty and if it is we load all of the features from $this->defined()
?
An alternative could be that I retrieve all of the features from LaunchDarkly within a service provider and define them. But this just seems wrong as I can do the same thing within the defined
method on the driver.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This approach would be perfect!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Opened a PR: #127
This should resolve #112
We are building a feature flags endpoint for our mobile and web consumers. We need to be able to get all features for 3-4 scopes which are related to the user, but not the user object itself.
I ran into this exact issue earlier today. I saw that this issue had been open for a few weeks without a PR so I figured I'd take a stab at it.
Given we have features defined for different scopes
When we attempt to load all features for a particular scope
Then we expect to receive feature flag definitions ONLY for that apply to Users.
Currently, however, an exception is thrown: TypeError: Tests\Feature\DatabaseDriverTest::Tests\Feature{closure}(): Argument #1 ($t) must be of type Workbench\App\Models\Team, Workbench\App\Models\User given, called in /Users/luke/Projects/laravel-pennant/src/Drivers/Decorator.php on line 173
Non-goals of this PR
One outstanding question is: do we expect to allow for union or intersection types in the resolving function? Like
Feature::define('team-or-user-feature', fn(Team|User $v) => true);
Seems like this probably wouldn't work with how scopes are set up in general. I am sure that my change will not work in this case.Also, you can still call
Feature::for($user)->activate('team-scoped-feature');
I believe that ideally there would be a guard for this, but it seems like it's beyond the scope of this PR.