-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
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
Dvc 8568 variations update in variables create #309
Dvc 8568 variations update in variables create #309
Conversation
elliotCamblor
commented
Oct 2, 2023
•
edited
Loading
edited
d4cc2e8
to
cb8e36d
Compare
cb8e36d
to
cf05dc2
Compare
@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ $ npm install -g @devcycle/cli | |||
$ dvc COMMAND | |||
running command... | |||
$ dvc (--version) | |||
@devcycle/cli/5.11.1 linux-x64 node-v18.16.0 |
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.
are we supposed to be committing these changes? my env always generates them but i just delete them
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.
Im not sure lol, Its just in the readme so I dont think it particularly matters
src/commands/variables/create.ts
Outdated
await variableListOptions.promptVariationValues(params as Variable) | ||
await updateFeature(this.authToken, this.projectKey, feature.key, feature) | ||
const message = `The variable was associated to the existing feature ${feature.key}. ` + | ||
`Use "dvc feature get ${feature.key}" to see its details` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
should be dvc features get --keys=${feature.key}
, i don't think we support get <key>
currently (although we should)
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.
also should we still output the variable result here as well as the success message? might be kind of awkward since we'd have to find the new variable in the result of updateFeature
but i feel like it might be annoying to have to get the feature separately just to check if you made a typo or something
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.
tbh I dont really think outputting the full variable is that useful here. Adam suggested that this be the response and I think I agree with him. Checking for a type is pretty much the only use case (especially since the command doesnt support headless mode if youre creating a feature)
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.
I will change the command thats output though, good catch!
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.
makes sense, works for me!
b973651
to
53050f1
Compare
53050f1
to
2fa99cf
Compare
2fa99cf
to
59bb792
Compare