-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 278
Experimental client: renaming #1401
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
Experimental client: renaming #1401
Conversation
Note that the names here are not package names: they're just module names where underscores can be used if it improves readability... but I'm fine with ngclient, no better ideas at the moment |
The reason I suggested |
I'll just correct myself here: they do seem to call any directory with I still maintain |
Agreed with @jku's review to move non-public modules to _internal.
Also rebased on latest changes in experimental-client branch. |
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.
Thanks!
There's obviously many valid choices here but I'm happy with ones made here
For some reason github claims there are conflicts here after merging 1403 -- manual rebase works without any issues though? |
The current client and the next-gen client should coexist in the same repository during the ongoing development of the latter. Looking for a name which is client-related, short, meeting PEP8 package names requirements. Currently "ngclient" seems to fit in until a better proposal comes. Rename updater_rework.py to updater.py Signed-off-by: Teodora Sechkova <[email protected]>
Separate public/private API. Keep modules containing the piblic classes in the main client directory and move the rest to _internal. Signed-off-by: Teodora Sechkova <[email protected]>
Only "Updater" and "FetcherInterface" are considered public classes of the client. Exposing them in __init__.py makes usage and access simpler. Signed-off-by: Teodora Sechkova <[email protected]>
Use the same call of black, isort, pylint to cover multiple directories. Signed-off-by: Teodora Sechkova <[email protected]>
Restore coverage back to 97% but omit ngclient form the overall score until tests are implemented. Signed-off-by: Teodora Sechkova <[email protected]>
Yep, rebased. |
Fixes #1397
Description of the changes being introduced by the pull request:
Note: this is done on top of changes introduced by #1396Proposes the following client naming and directory structure:
Most significant changes:
client_rework
->ngclient
(next-gen-client): almost what @jku suggested but trying to avoid dashes (not accepted) and underscores (not recommended) in package names.ngclient/__init__.py
network
.FetcherInterface
is defined innetwork/__init__.py
instead offetcher.py
Please verify and check that the pull request fulfills the following
requirements: