feat(resolver): olm.constraint property and compound constraints#2418
Conversation
|
Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request. |
|
/cc @joelanford |
e12a395 to
be8bd26
Compare
46b0733 to
693d013
Compare
olm.constraint property and compound constraints
|
I'm in the process of adding resolver unit tests for compound constraints. |
693d013 to
e09bd8e
Compare
dinhxuanvu
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just took a quick glance. Will do further review later.
c9e0398 to
0a2da9c
Compare
fc37004 to
2060d89
Compare
|
|
||
| func DependencyPredicates(properties []*api.Property) ([]cache.Predicate, error) { | ||
| // predicateConverter configures olm.constraint value -> predicate conversion for the resolver. | ||
| type predicateConverter struct{} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This will contain fields when CEL is added.
Signed-off-by: Eric Stroczynski <ericstroczynski@gmail.com>
2060d89 to
ba9f369
Compare
dinhxuanvu
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The PR looks good.
/approve
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: dinhxuanvu, estroz The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
/lgtm |
Description of the change:
olm.constraintdependency property to resolverall,any,noneconstraint typesMotivation for the change: compound dependency constraints (see operator-framework/enhancements#97).
Reviewer Checklist
/doc/kind feature