Skip to content

Provide a ServiceGroupConfiguration initializer without `gracefulSh… #147

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

FranzBusch
Copy link
Contributor

…utdownSignals` signals

Motivation

When using the ServiceGroup in non-top-level setups such as inside a Service.run() method then it is confusing if you are forced to pass gracefulShutdownSignals.

Modification

This PR adds a new initializer to ServiceGroupConfiguration which takes no arguments.

Result

Less confusion when using the service group inside a non-top-level context.

…utdownSignals` signals

# Motivation
When using the `ServiceGroup` in non-top-level setups such as inside a `Service.run()` method then it is confusing if you are forced to pass `gracefulShutdownSignals`.

# Modification
This PR adds a new initializer to `ServiceGroupConfiguration` which takes no arguments.

# Result
Less confusion when using the service group inside a non-top-level context.
@FranzBusch FranzBusch requested a review from gjcairo August 12, 2023 14:58
@FranzBusch
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this in favour of: #148

@FranzBusch FranzBusch closed this Aug 14, 2023
@FranzBusch FranzBusch deleted the fb-configuration-initializer branch August 14, 2023 10:13
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.

1 participant