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

refactor(rules): organize code in the packages, prepare for inbound rules #12559

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

lobkovilya
Copy link
Contributor

Motivation

  • with the introduction of inbound rules, a single file rules.go is insufficient
  • new inbound rules are going to introduce a new entry type (i.e. to[i] has targetRef and default fields, while rules[i] is going to have default, matches, targetRef fields). It's easier to use generics, like
    type WithPolicyAttributes[T any] struct {
    	Entry T
    
    	TopLevel  common_api.TargetRef
    	Meta      core_model.ResourceMeta
    	RuleIndex int
    }
    to share the code between inbound and outbound rules (see packages merge, sort, common)

Supporting documentation

Check commit to see how new inbound rules are implemented

@lobkovilya lobkovilya requested a review from a team as a code owner January 15, 2025 10:34
@@ -0,0 +1,339 @@
package subsetutils
Copy link
Contributor Author

@lobkovilya lobkovilya Jan 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

there are just copies of functions from rules.go in this file, you can skip reviewing this

Copy link
Contributor

Reviewer Checklist

🔍 Each of these sections need to be checked by the reviewer of the PR 🔍:
If something doesn't apply please check the box and add a justification if the reason is non obvious.

  • Is the PR title satisfactory? Is this part of a larger feature and should be grouped using > Changelog?
  • PR description is clear and complete. It Links to relevant issue as well as docs and UI issues
  • This will not break child repos: it doesn't hardcode values (.e.g "kumahq" as an image registry)
  • IPv6 is taken into account (.e.g: no string concatenation of host port)
  • Tests (Unit test, E2E tests, manual test on universal and k8s)
    • Don't forget ci/ labels to run additional/fewer tests
  • Does this contain a change that needs to be notified to users? In this case, UPGRADE.md should be updated.
  • Does it need to be backported according to the backporting policy? (this GH action will add "backport" label based on these file globs, if you want to prevent it from adding the "backport" label use no-backport-autolabel label)

Signed-off-by: Ilya Lobkov <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ilya Lobkov <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ilya Lobkov <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ilya Lobkov <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ilya Lobkov <[email protected]>
Automaat
Automaat previously approved these changes Jan 16, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we do proper git mv ? This would greatly simplify this PR

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it's already moved where possible, sometimes the code is copied from rules.go to more specific packages and in this case git mv won't help

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