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

[chore] Move exporterhelper queue code to exporterqueue #12033

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 7, 2025

Conversation

bogdandrutu
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 7, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 94.73684% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 91.67%. Comparing base (6c99ba0) to head (7d612f1).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
exporter/internal/storagetest/mock_storage.go 75.00% 1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #12033      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.67%   91.67%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         455      455              
  Lines       24033    24032       -1     
==========================================
- Hits        22032    22031       -1     
  Misses       1629     1629              
  Partials      372      372              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Member

@mx-psi mx-psi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you add a link/explanation on why we want to do this? This would increase the public API surface so I feel like we need to do some due diligence

@bogdandrutu
Copy link
Member Author

bogdandrutu commented Jan 7, 2025

This would increase the public API surface so I feel like we need to do some due diligence

Why? Everything is private types/funcs unless I missed something?

Could you add a link/explanation on why we want to do this?

Not sure we need to explain that is better to have the implementation of the interfaces and the interface definition close to each other.

Edit: Also, soon we need to extract "exporterqueue" so better to avoid circular dependencies between modules (even if possible, it is a sign of a bad design).

@mx-psi
Copy link
Member

mx-psi commented Jan 7, 2025

Why? Everything is private types/funcs unless I missed something?

Ah, looks like I got confused, sorry! LGTM then

@bogdandrutu
Copy link
Member Author

@mx-psi thank you

@bogdandrutu bogdandrutu added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 7, 2025
Merged via the queue into open-telemetry:main with commit d2c178b Jan 7, 2025
52 of 53 checks passed
@bogdandrutu bogdandrutu deleted the mv-queue-code branch January 7, 2025 17:51
sfc-gh-sili pushed a commit to sfc-gh-sili/opentelemetry-collector that referenced this pull request Jan 15, 2025
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.

2 participants