-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4k
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
Make 'ID' optional in a WorkItem attribute #67216
Conversation
@jcouv ptal. |
Way back in the days of yore, the URLs for all the various work item types were not so easily parsable. This is why the ID field was added, to let analysis happen on the code base without having to encode 5-10 ways of parsing tricky URLs to find the bug number in question. That was back in the days of yore though, these days everything is easily parsable. |
/// </summary> | ||
/// <param name="issueUri">The URI where the work item can be viewed. This is a link to work item in the | ||
/// original source.</param> | ||
public WorkItemAttribute(string issueUri) : this(-1, issueUri) |
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.
Why even keep around the other ctor?
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.
Oh did we turn off your other PR to just remove all the instances where we passed the ID?
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.
Yes. It was rejected :)
One reason si that we have a handful of WorkItems where the id doesn't match between the number and the string. And there are a small handful where the uri is just something like I'd love to go clean all those up as well, but that's a more onerous task, hunting down what those all mean. For now though, this allows the 99.9% case to migrate. My intent is to change teh IDE to use this universally. Compiler will stay with the existing redundant form for now. |
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.
LGTM (commit 1)
Just a reminder, test only changes can be merged with a single sign-off from the Compiler team. |
Sounds good. Thanks! |
Once you merge the other change I'll go through and clean up the rest. The thought being that if I don't have context for whath the right number is probably no one does so can fix or delete. |
I def think it can be figured out. For example, if we have But i def appreciate any help here to make this hte consistent pattern we use for everything. it will help make things much cleaner and simpler (and will avoid this exact issue which clearly happened to a bunch of tests :)). |
No description provided.