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

Add dependency graph support to remaining ecosystems #754

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 15, 2024

Conversation

jalkire
Copy link
Contributor

@jalkire jalkire commented Oct 15, 2024

This PR builds off of #746 to add support for ancestral dependencies of the remaining ecosystems supported by CD. The list of ecosystems supporting graph creation can be found here.

@jalkire jalkire requested a review from a team as a code owner October 15, 2024 16:38
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Oct 15, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 60.00000% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 70.13%. Comparing base (4e682e6) to head (ae1b1d4).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...pters/ComponentDetection/PodComponentExtensions.cs 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
.../ComponentDetection/RubyGemsComponentExtensions.cs 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #754      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   70.13%   70.13%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         277      277              
  Lines        8646     8651       +5     
  Branches     1006     1006              
==========================================
+ Hits         6064     6067       +3     
- Misses       2063     2065       +2     
  Partials      519      519              

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

Copy link
Contributor

@DaveTryon DaveTryon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Are there any concerns caused by a diamond pattern? For instance, if my app has direct dependencies on package X and package Y, and those packages each have a direct dependency on package Z, does package Z get included as a dependency of both X and Y, or either X or Y ?

@jalkire
Copy link
Contributor Author

jalkire commented Oct 15, 2024

Are there any concerns caused by a diamond pattern? For instance, if my app has direct dependencies on package X and package Y, and those packages each have a direct dependency on package Z, does package Z get included as a dependency of both X and Y, or either X or Y ?

That's a good question! As it stands in this and the previous PR, the latter would occur (either X or Y). We primarily care about differentiating between direct and indirect dependencies, but I will double check if the both X and Y behavior is preferable.

@jalkire jalkire enabled auto-merge (squash) October 15, 2024 18:14
@jalkire jalkire merged commit a6b9f9c into main Oct 15, 2024
6 checks passed
@jalkire jalkire deleted the jalkire/remaining-component-graphs branch October 15, 2024 18:21
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