-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 116
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
Clarify how source ordinal applies with an active profile #782
Clarify how source ordinal applies with an active profile #782
Conversation
Can one of the admins verify this patch? |
@poikilotherm you need to sign ECA form first. Please click on the Details above and follow instructions there. |
Was already on it 😉 Successfully signed and re-validated just now. Please let me know what you think about the extended spec. Thank you very much for looking into this @Emily-Jiang ! |
Thank you @poikilotherm for the PR! Can you also add a couple of sentence on the spec to state the behavior? |
Hi @Emily-Jiang thanks for the feedback. Unfortunately, I'm not sure what you are referring to? Is there some other place in the spec that I should edit besides the profile details that needed clarification? Any hints are much appreciated! |
Sorry for not being clear. I have added more detailed thoughts inline. Will you be able to take at this PR? |
@Emily-Jiang thank you for your additional feedback! I rephrased a little as you suggested. Please let me know if this is better now. I already worked on adding a new TCK test locally, but struggeling to find a property not altered by other tests, so it can be used here. Will continue coding, maybe push something preliminary, too, so y'all could have a look. |
A config source with higher ordinal should still override a profiled value from a lower ordinal source with a non-profiled property name.
@Emily-Jiang @radcortez @smillidge I just added the new TCK test to this PR. If you want to see it in action, I took notes how to execute the test in addition to the others: https://notes.desy.de/iDjhL8UESlO-_RGNKLDRZQ As expected, Payara fails to be spec compliant, while SmallRye is compliant. |
tck/src/main/java/org/eclipse/microprofile/config/tck/profile/OverrideConfigProfileTest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
tck/src/main/java/org/eclipse/microprofile/config/tck/profile/OverrideConfigProfileTest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
@poikilotherm can you address the above comments so that I can merge your PR? |
Please excuse my slow response time @Emily-Jiang - I'm on vacation. Applied changes as requested. Thank you again for looking into this! |
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! Thank you @poikilotherm for your contribution!
@poikilotherm Can you fix the following format issue?
|
…n with codebase standard
@Emily-Jiang done! 😄 |
I will squash and merge your PR @poikilotherm and deal with the format with a separate PR if the build still fails. |
Thank you very much @Emily-Jiang ! Much appreciated! Glad this is fixed now. |
Closes #781
This pull request tries to rephrase parts of the profile on property level spec to clarify how ordinal of sources and the profiled vs. unprofiled values work together.