Add flow to create simple boolean flag #354

dcramer · 2020-04-09T20:20:33Z

This exposes a way to create a new pre-filled simple flag. It includes a single segment, variant, and predefined distribution allowing you to more easily create a yes/no feature flag check.

It's exposed using the {template: "simple"} parameter on the flag creation endpoint. Additionally it exposes the action in the UI as a dropdown alongside the existing Create Flag action.

Fixes #345

dcramer · 2020-04-09T20:21:16Z

Feel free to nitpick the tests/go/etc here as I just threw stuff together. Haven't ever touched swagger or Vue, and haven't written Go in years.

Also if there are more descriptive/obvious names we can use for 'template' or 'simple' its worth thinking about that.

dcramer · 2020-04-09T20:22:33Z

go.sum

@@ -21,18 +21,21 @@ github.com/alecthomas/units v0.0.0-20151022065526-2efee857e7cf/go.mod h1:ybxpYRF
 github.com/apache/thrift v0.12.0/go.mod h1:cp2SuWMxlEZw2r+iP2GNCdIi4C1qmUzdZFSVb+bacwQ=
 github.com/asaskevich/govalidator v0.0.0-20180315120708-ccb8e960c48f h1:y2hSFdXeA1y5z5f0vfNO0Dg5qVY036qzlz3Pds0B92o=
 github.com/asaskevich/govalidator v0.0.0-20180315120708-ccb8e960c48f/go.mod h1:lB+ZfQJz7igIIfQNfa7Ml4HSf2uFQQRzpGGRXenZAgY=
+github.com/auth0/go-jwt-middleware v0.0.0-20170425171159-5493cabe49f7 h1:irR1cO6eek3n5uquIVaRAsQmZnlsfPuHNz31cXo4eyk=


im guessing these are all ok, but every time I run builds it re-adds them to go.sum, so maybe worth just sorting out/committing

yes, usually they are ok, especially when it passes the unit/integration tests.

dcramer · 2020-04-09T20:22:55Z

browser/flagr-ui/src/components/Flags.vue

-              <el-input
-                placeholder="Specific new flag description"
-                v-model="newFlag.description">
+              <el-input placeholder="Specific new flag description" v-model="newFlag.description">


lots of changes in here from prettier, but most of this is just the onCommandDropdown handler and related elements

dcramer · 2020-04-09T20:23:21Z

pkg/handler/crud.go

 		return flag.NewCreateFlagDefault(500).WithPayload(
 			ErrorMessage("cannot create flag. %s", err))
 	}

+	if params.Body.Template == "simple" {


I was hoping there might be a better way to use a constant here, but got a bit overwhelmed when going down that route and figuring out how it'd make sense w/ swagger/etc.

Agreed, I think swagger is more for schema, inside backend, we can use constants as validation. Actually, it's also a good opportunity to do some refactoring, this function is too long. We can have a file crud_flag_creation.go in the same handler folder, and dedicates the creation by template logic there. Also the template name simple, variant on key can be defined as constants.

For the naming of template, how about we start with something explicit first simple_boolean_flag instead of simple? It's easier to extend that to simple_ab_experiment and simple_dynamic_configuration in the future.

dcramer · 2020-04-09T20:23:37Z

pkg/handler/crud.go

@@ -142,6 +186,7 @@ func (c *crud) CreateFlag(params flag.CreateFlagParams) middleware.Responder {
 	resp.SetPayload(payload)

 	entity.SaveFlagSnapshot(getDB(), f.ID, getSubjectFromRequest(params.HTTPRequest))


should this be part of the transaction somehow? just mimicking other endpoints right now but maybe something for followup

yes, tracked here #355

dcramer · 2020-04-09T20:23:59Z

pkg/handler/crud_test.go

+			},
+		})
+		assert.NotZero(t, res.(*flag.CreateFlagOK).Payload.ID)
+		assert.Equal(t, "simple_flag_key", res.(*flag.CreateFlagOK).Payload.Key)


I could assert more on the return payload here, as I realized it should return variants/segments as part of it meaning we can do full validation

actually looks like payload isnt correct - it does save segment/variant/etc but doesnt return in payload.. will explore but if you have guidance lmk

fixed this but would appreciate feedback if the way im managing the arrays is correct

dcramer · 2020-04-09T20:24:26Z

pkg/handler/crud_test.go

+		assert.Equal(t, segment.Rank, entity.SegmentDefaultRank)
+
+		variant := entity.Variant{FlagID: flagID}
+		db.First(&variant)


would have preferred to do .Find() and then assert, but couldnt actually figure out how to construct the query/objects. also didnt read any kind of docs so maybe its not that hard ;)

Yes, First works, since you are finding the first variant with the flagID you just created. Some syntax for query. https://gorm.io/docs/query.html

dcramer · 2020-04-09T20:27:54Z

question for anyone paying attention: are there other kinds of templates that could exist? is that kind of behavior something that might be valuable in heavy use of this system?

dcramer · 2020-04-10T00:14:20Z

pkg/handler/crud.go

+
+		if err := tx.Create(s).Error; err != nil {
+			tx.Rollback()
+			return segment.NewCreateSegmentDefault(500).WithPayload(ErrorMessage("%s", err))


reading this i think these actually need to be all NewCreateFlagDefault

codecov-io · 2020-04-10T00:47:39Z

Codecov Report

Merging #354 into master will decrease coverage by 0.41%.
The diff coverage is 62.50%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #354      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   81.75%   81.33%   -0.42%     
==========================================
  Files          26       26              
  Lines        1540     1570      +30     
==========================================
+ Hits         1259     1277      +18     
- Misses        211      219       +8     
- Partials       70       74       +4

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pkg/handler/crud.go	`87.33% <62.50%> (-2.35%)`	⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update c703eb6...848bcf0. Read the comment docs.

zhouzhuojie

Thanks for the PR, awesome work! Left a few comments about refactoring.

zhouzhuojie · 2020-04-10T17:05:49Z

go.sum

@@ -21,18 +21,21 @@ github.com/alecthomas/units v0.0.0-20151022065526-2efee857e7cf/go.mod h1:ybxpYRF
 github.com/apache/thrift v0.12.0/go.mod h1:cp2SuWMxlEZw2r+iP2GNCdIi4C1qmUzdZFSVb+bacwQ=
 github.com/asaskevich/govalidator v0.0.0-20180315120708-ccb8e960c48f h1:y2hSFdXeA1y5z5f0vfNO0Dg5qVY036qzlz3Pds0B92o=
 github.com/asaskevich/govalidator v0.0.0-20180315120708-ccb8e960c48f/go.mod h1:lB+ZfQJz7igIIfQNfa7Ml4HSf2uFQQRzpGGRXenZAgY=
+github.com/auth0/go-jwt-middleware v0.0.0-20170425171159-5493cabe49f7 h1:irR1cO6eek3n5uquIVaRAsQmZnlsfPuHNz31cXo4eyk=


yes, usually they are ok, especially when it passes the unit/integration tests.

docs/api_docs/bundle.yaml

zhouzhuojie · 2020-04-10T17:15:51Z

pkg/handler/crud.go

 		return flag.NewCreateFlagDefault(500).WithPayload(
 			ErrorMessage("cannot create flag. %s", err))
 	}

+	if params.Body.Template == "simple" {


Agreed, I think swagger is more for schema, inside backend, we can use constants as validation. Actually, it's also a good opportunity to do some refactoring, this function is too long. We can have a file crud_flag_creation.go in the same handler folder, and dedicates the creation by template logic there. Also the template name simple, variant on key can be defined as constants.

For the naming of template, how about we start with something explicit first simple_boolean_flag instead of simple? It's easier to extend that to simple_ab_experiment and simple_dynamic_configuration in the future.

zhouzhuojie · 2020-04-10T17:22:15Z

pkg/handler/crud.go

@@ -142,6 +186,7 @@ func (c *crud) CreateFlag(params flag.CreateFlagParams) middleware.Responder {
 	resp.SetPayload(payload)

 	entity.SaveFlagSnapshot(getDB(), f.ID, getSubjectFromRequest(params.HTTPRequest))


yes, tracked here #355

zhouzhuojie · 2020-04-10T17:26:13Z

pkg/handler/crud_test.go

+		assert.Equal(t, segment.Rank, entity.SegmentDefaultRank)
+
+		variant := entity.Variant{FlagID: flagID}
+		db.First(&variant)


Yes, First works, since you are finding the first variant with the flagID you just created. Some syntax for query. https://gorm.io/docs/query.html

dcramer · 2020-04-10T17:55:49Z

Thanks! Updated based on feedback.

dcramer commented Apr 9, 2020

View reviewed changes

dcramer commented Apr 10, 2020

View reviewed changes

Add flow to create simple boolean flag

848bcf0

zhouzhuojie reviewed Apr 10, 2020

View reviewed changes

Refactor flag creation and rename simple -> simple_boolean_flag

19d9940

zhouzhuojie approved these changes Apr 10, 2020

View reviewed changes

zhouzhuojie merged commit fd702e9 into openflagr:master Apr 10, 2020

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add flow to create simple boolean flag #354

Add flow to create simple boolean flag #354

dcramer commented Apr 9, 2020 •

edited

Loading

dcramer commented Apr 9, 2020 •

edited

Loading

dcramer Apr 9, 2020

zhouzhuojie Apr 10, 2020

dcramer Apr 9, 2020

dcramer Apr 9, 2020

zhouzhuojie Apr 10, 2020

dcramer Apr 9, 2020

zhouzhuojie Apr 10, 2020

dcramer Apr 9, 2020

dcramer Apr 9, 2020

dcramer Apr 9, 2020

dcramer Apr 9, 2020

zhouzhuojie Apr 10, 2020

dcramer commented Apr 9, 2020

dcramer Apr 10, 2020

codecov-io commented Apr 10, 2020

zhouzhuojie left a comment

zhouzhuojie Apr 10, 2020

zhouzhuojie Apr 10, 2020

zhouzhuojie Apr 10, 2020

zhouzhuojie Apr 10, 2020

dcramer commented Apr 10, 2020

		@@ -142,6 +186,7 @@ func (c *crud) CreateFlag(params flag.CreateFlagParams) middleware.Responder {
		resp.SetPayload(payload)

		entity.SaveFlagSnapshot(getDB(), f.ID, getSubjectFromRequest(params.HTTPRequest))

Add flow to create simple boolean flag #354

Add flow to create simple boolean flag #354

Conversation

dcramer commented Apr 9, 2020 • edited Loading

dcramer commented Apr 9, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dcramer commented Apr 9, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

codecov-io commented Apr 10, 2020

Codecov Report

zhouzhuojie left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dcramer commented Apr 10, 2020

dcramer commented Apr 9, 2020 •

edited

Loading

dcramer commented Apr 9, 2020 •

edited

Loading