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

build providers: support for provider setup #2515

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 26, 2019

Conversation

sergiusens
Copy link
Collaborator

Move checks and setup to the provider implementation.

LP: #1821586
Signed-off-by: Sergio Schvezov sergio.schvezov@canonical.com

  • Have you followed the guidelines for contributing?
  • Have you signed the CLA?
  • Have you successfully run ./runtests.sh static?
  • Have you successfully run ./runtests.sh tests/unit?

Move checks and setup to the provider implementation.

LP: #1821586
Signed-off-by: Sergio Schvezov <sergio.schvezov@canonical.com>
@sergiusens sergiusens force-pushed the build-provider-setup branch from 1ffa120 to e6a4c0d Compare March 25, 2019 19:07
"Install {command!r} or if already installed, ensure it is "
"on the system PATH, and try again."
)
fmt = "You need {provider!r} setup to build snaps: {error_message}."
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Shouldn't this be "set up"?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, I guess

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"set-up" IMO

Copy link
Contributor

@cmatsuoka cmatsuoka left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Overall a nice implementation of moving multipass-specific code to the provider. There's a couple of nitpicking points you may agree with or not.

snapcraft/cli/lifecycle.py Show resolved Hide resolved
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Mar 25, 2019

Codecov Report

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (master@46e3d17). Click here to learn what that means.
The diff coverage is 74.24%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master    #2515   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage          ?   90.01%           
=========================================
  Files             ?      198           
  Lines             ?    13379           
  Branches          ?     2023           
=========================================
  Hits              ?    12043           
  Misses            ?      909           
  Partials          ?      427
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
snapcraft/project/_sanity_checks.py 100% <ø> (ø)
snapcraft/project/errors.py 96.66% <ø> (ø)
...apcraft/internal/build_providers/_base_provider.py 84.21% <100%> (ø)
snapcraft/internal/build_providers/errors.py 94.8% <100%> (ø)
snapcraft/cli/lifecycle.py 84.8% <30%> (ø)
.../internal/build_providers/_multipass/_multipass.py 83.62% <66.66%> (ø)
...l/build_providers/_multipass/_multipass_command.py 77.85% <78.37%> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 46e3d17...82f78ef. Read the comment docs.

@sergiusens sergiusens merged commit e4a5788 into canonical:master Mar 26, 2019
@sergiusens sergiusens deleted the build-provider-setup branch March 26, 2019 12:22
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.

4 participants