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

EBP-567: Update Cache Request Strategy Names #102

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 19, 2025
Merged

Conversation

TrentDaniel
Copy link

Updated names of cache request strategy variants so they can be more clearly associated with cache operations specifically, rather than be considered a general resource of the API

… be more clearly associated with cache operations specifically, rather than be considered a general resource of the API
Copy link

gitstream-cm bot commented Feb 18, 2025

Please mark whether you used Copilot to assist coding in this PR

  • Copilot Assisted

Copy link

@sdewilde sdewilde left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Copy link

@aelsammak aelsammak left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Name updates LGTM! This can be merged once CICD passes.

@aelsammak
Copy link

However, there are test failures which look related to the name change.

Error: ./cache_test.go:589:33: undefined: helpers.GetValidLiveCancelsCachedRequestConfig
Error: ./cache_test.go:597:33: undefined: helpers.GetValidAsAvailableCacheRequestConfig
Error: ./cache_test.go:605:33: undefined: helpers.GetValidCachedFirstCacheRequestConfig
Error: ./cache_test.go:613:33: undefined: helpers.GetValidCachedOnlyCacheRequestConfig

@TrentDaniel TrentDaniel merged commit a533d12 into SOL-62456 Feb 19, 2025
3 of 5 checks passed
@TrentDaniel TrentDaniel deleted the EBP-567 branch February 19, 2025 19:23
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