Groups in DocTags #7337
Groups in DocTags #7337
Conversation
farmaazon
force-pushed
the
wip/farmaazon/groups-in-tags
branch
from
3347b55 to
6e8b1ac
Compare
farmaazon
force-pushed
the
wip/farmaazon/groups-in-tags
branch
from
a284977 to
acb24e0
Compare
farmaazon
requested review from
jdunkerley,
radeusgd,
GregoryTravis,
MichaelMauderer,
mwu-tow,
kazcw,
vitvakatu,
Frizi and
JaroslavTulach
as code owners
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this solution also renders further work #6497 unnecessary? Oh, my procrastination and laziness...
Co-authored-by: Ilya Bogdanov <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ilya Bogdanov <[email protected]>
|
I believe the longer term approach is to go for attributes still. |
|
Yep, our plans is to use doc tags instead of attributes before the support for attributes lands. |
QA: 🟢 |
|
@jdunkerley @radeusgd @GregoryTravis I need an accept from one of you, as I changed libraries' code. |
| - Input: {} | ||
| - Web: {} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do the groups still need to be defined in package.yaml?
What if we annotate a method with a GROUP xyz when xyz is not defined in package.yaml?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes the groups have to be defined in the package.yaml.
It is supposed to generate an error but that may not be done yet,
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IDE will print the error log and the entry will not be assigned to any group.
Fixes #7336 in a quick way. Next to the old way of defining groups, the library can just add `GROUP` tag to some entities, and it will be added to the group specified in tag's description. The group name may be qualified (with project name, like `Standard.Base.Input/Output`) or just name - in the latter case, IDE will assume a group defined in the same library as the entity. Also moved some entities from "export" list in package.yaml to GROUP tag to give an example. I didn't move all of those, as I assume the library team will reorganize those groups anyway. @jdunkerley @radeusgd @GregoryTravis When you will start specifying groups in tags, remember that: * The groups still belongs to a concrete project; if some entity outside a project wants to be added to its group, the "qualified" name should be specified. See `Table.new` example in this PR. * If the group name does not reflect any group in package.yaml **the tag is ignored**. * A single entity may be only in a single group. If it's specified in both package.yaml and in tag, the tag takes precedence. --------- Co-authored-by: Ilya Bogdanov <[email protected]>
Pull Request Description
Fixes #7336 in a quick way.
Next to the old way of defining groups, the library can just add
GROUPtag to some entities, and it will be added to the group specified in tag's description.The group name may be qualified (with project name, like
Standard.Base.Input/Output) or just name - in the latter case, IDE will assume a group defined in the same library as the entity.Also moved some entities from "export" list in package.yaml to GROUP tag to give an example. I didn't move all of those, as I assume the library team will reorganize those groups anyway.
Important Notes
@jdunkerley @radeusgd @GregoryTravis When you will start specifying groups in tags, remember that:
Table.newexample in this PR.Checklist
Please ensure that the following checklist has been satisfied before submitting the PR:
Scala,
Java,
and
Rust
style guides. In case you are using a language not listed above, follow the Rust style guide.
./run ide build.