Skip to content

Remove ConstraintProvider from the exported solver package API. #2675

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

Conversation

benluddy
Copy link
Contributor

This interface is a resolver package concern, so its definition can
live beside the code that accepts it. Removing it from solver also
removes the only solver->cache package dependency.

As I understand it, the only way to inject an implementation of this
interface today is by having access to unexported fields of
resolver.Resolver, so for now I've also made the interface
unexported. In the context of the ongoing desire to support resolution
as a separate library module, this will allow more time to evaluate
the shape of a stable library API.

This interface is a resolver package concern, so its definition can
live beside the code that accepts it. Removing it from solver also
removes the only solver->cache package dependency.

As I understand it, the only way to inject an implementation of this
interface today is by having access to unexported fields of
resolver.Resolver, so for now I've also made the interface
unexported. In the context of the ongoing desire to support resolution
as a separate library module, this will allow more time to evaluate
the shape of a stable library API.

Signed-off-by: Ben Luddy <[email protected]>
@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 24, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: benluddy

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Feb 24, 2022
@njhale
Copy link
Member

njhale commented Feb 24, 2022

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 24, 2022
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 5cf7f1f into operator-framework:master Feb 24, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants