-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38
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
feat: adds allFlagMetadata to clients and provider interface #245
Closed
Closed
Changes from 14 commits
Commits
Show all changes
15 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
84a5412
feat: adds allFlagKeys to provider metadata
maxveldink 129712e
docs: Return flag metadata instead of just flag keys
maxveldink ec843ba
docs: Make type optional and clarify intention
maxveldink 906ed81
refactor: Move allFlagMetadata to provider directly
maxveldink 72b496f
feat: Add allFlagMetadata to client
maxveldink fba1a6a
fix: Don't use markdown in specification
maxveldink fb43545
docs: Change async callout to non-normative
maxveldink 163579e
docs: Use null value on client if not implemented on provider
maxveldink 828af47
docs: Add more non-normative text for why the allFlags accessor exists
maxveldink 6465990
docs: PR fixes
maxveldink f08ee9e
feat: return structure from getAllFlagMetadata calls
maxveldink fc5ed55
Merge branch 'main' into maxveldink/get-all-flags
maxveldink df54e35
docs: Clarify Types changes
maxveldink b43feb0
docs: Add clarification on provider method around error or not implem…
maxveldink dff60ea
refactor: Clarify language around available flags
maxveldink File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
maxveldink marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
The method is planned to be named
getAllFlagMetadata
but the description mentions this returns "currently active" flags only. Is "currently active" defined further somewhere?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.
Good point, worth clarifying this. My personal understanding is that it refers to the enabled feature flags in the provider
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.
Thanks for catching that! I know
active
is semantically significant for most vendors. I tried to clarify this by changing it toavailable
, which can be interpreted different per provider.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.
@dferber90 I hope it clarifies it. What do you think of this enhancement?