[components] Remove AutomationConditionModel in favor of raw python object #26649
+123
−82
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Warning This pull request is not mergeable via GitHub because a downstack PR is open. Once all requirements are satisfied, merge this PR as a stack on Graphite.
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. |
OwenKephart
force-pushed
the
12-20-_components_templating_for_asset_attributes
branch
from
813dc40 to
483060a
Compare
OwenKephart
force-pushed
the
12-20-_components_remove_automationconditionmodel_in_favor_of_raw_python_object
branch
from
aa2a754 to
63116a8
Compare
OwenKephart
commented
Dec 20, 2024
Comment on lines
+33
to
+35
| automation_condition: Optional[Union[str, AutomationCondition]] = RenderingScope( | ||
| Field(None), required_scope={"automation_condition"} | ||
| ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Technically, this field should actually just be of type Optional[str].
I want to do a followup here where we do something like:
automation_condition: Optional[str] = RenderedField(Optional[AutomationCondition], required_scope={"automation_condition"})where we can have separate type checking for the rendered value
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this would be a great followup.
Leave comment to this effect explaining the next steps.
OwenKephart
force-pushed
the
12-20-_components_templating_for_asset_attributes
branch
from
483060a to
38baab7
Compare
OwenKephart
force-pushed
the
12-20-_components_remove_automationconditionmodel_in_favor_of_raw_python_object
branch
from
63116a8 to
cf4029f
Compare
OwenKephart
force-pushed
the
12-20-_components_templating_for_asset_attributes
branch
from
38baab7 to
67dc5d0
Compare
OwenKephart
force-pushed
the
12-20-_components_remove_automationconditionmodel_in_favor_of_raw_python_object
branch
from
cf4029f to
a5770fd
Compare
OwenKephart
force-pushed
the
12-20-_components_templating_for_asset_attributes
branch
from
67dc5d0 to
3deb344
Compare
OwenKephart
force-pushed
the
12-20-_components_remove_automationconditionmodel_in_favor_of_raw_python_object
branch
from
a5770fd to
2b0ff0d
Compare
OwenKephart
force-pushed
the
12-20-_components_templating_for_asset_attributes
branch
from
3deb344 to
7eb1d13
Compare
OwenKephart
force-pushed
the
12-20-_components_remove_automationconditionmodel_in_favor_of_raw_python_object
branch
from
2b0ff0d to
5fa066b
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary & Motivation
As title -- this pattern generally allows us to avoid creating parallel schemas for all of our library objects.
How I Tested These Changes
Changelog
NOCHANGELOG