feat(data-modeling): integrate diagramming package COMPASS-9357 #6979
Conversation
…nto diagramming
|
i have no idea what exploded lock file |
| source: source.ns, | ||
| target: target.ns, | ||
| markerStart: 'one', | ||
| markerEnd: 'many', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this a placeholder item?
Something that's become fairly clear over time is that we're likely going to want to work with concrete cardinalities if we can (i.e. number ranges rather than one or many)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, actually it needs to be like that. I'll change this to reflect the store cardinalities. My assumption is that we will be having 1 or 2 as numeric representation for one and many respectively.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So ... what we'll ultimately have is descriptions like "1 to 4–6" or something along those lines, at least if we ultimately want to give schema recommendations (still a goal for Compass to have that eventually), because it's become pretty clear that the numeric values of the relative cardinality ranges matter for those (you maybe be able to create an embedding of collections in a 1:5 case but not in a 1:200 case)
| ? 'Unknown' | ||
| : typeof field.bsonType === 'string' | ||
| ? field.bsonType | ||
| : field.bsonType[0]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This line is also some sort of TODO?
Looking through it, it mostly seems to be additions of genuine new dependencies? |
package-lock.json
Outdated
| "configs/eslint-config-compass/node_modules/eslint": { | ||
| "version": "8.57.1", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems like something went really wrong when you installed a new dep, you now have two versions of eslint in package-lock, one of them is not matchin the required one. This is partially why package-lock blew up so much and why CI is failing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, i finally resolved this, thank you. I tried checking out lock file from main couple of times and was not sure what I am missing. Eventually from your other comment realized its origin that I am missing.
| // to React 18, but for the time being we will just resolve react to | ||
| // actual files ourselves to work around that | ||
| 'react/jsx-runtime': require.resolve('react/jsx-runtime'), | ||
| react: require.resolve('react'), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Probably should add this to ignore in depcheckrc file, we do this already for another package that we just need to resolve
| title={diagramLabel} | ||
| edges={edges} | ||
| nodes={nodes} | ||
| onEdgeClick={(evt, edge) => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think we'll be doing removal like this, but it's actually neat for now :)
Description
Checklist
Motivation and Context
Open Questions
Dependents
Types of changes