Skip to content
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

fix: use version sorting in codegen, not lexical #1174

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 28, 2024

Conversation

dimaqq
Copy link
Contributor

@dimaqq dimaqq commented Oct 22, 2024

Cherry-picked from #1168 and simplified.

Rationale Juju micro versions can get larger than 9, e.g. 2.9.51.

When 3.5.10 comes around, we want it to take precedence over 3.5.9 and not get wedged between 3.5.1 and 3.5.2

Keeping the current codegen mode of operation where it starts with the oldest version and whacks some internal state on encountering a latter version.

(We'll deal with that in a separate PR)

Previously, python-libjuju iterated over schemas keyed by their version
string (e.g. '3.1.9') using lexical sorting. For a given facade version,
a definition in a higher versioned schema was intended to overwrite any
prior definition saved (see generate_facades function in facade.py).
With lexical sorting, '3.1.10' would be sorted in between '3.1.1' and
'3.1.2', which would not lead to the desired behaviour. This commit
fixes this problem by using a tuple of integers as the sorting key. A
special case is requried for the version string 'latest', and we use
(9000, 9000, 9000).
@james-garner-canonical
Copy link
Contributor

/merge

@jujubot jujubot merged commit 74ab0f6 into juju:main Oct 28, 2024
22 of 23 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants