Skip to content

fix: move default client to abstract extension, use config if available #1512

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 5, 2022

Conversation

metacosm
Copy link
Collaborator

@metacosm metacosm commented Oct 3, 2022

No description provided.

@metacosm metacosm self-assigned this Oct 3, 2022
@metacosm metacosm requested a review from csviri October 3, 2022 14:40
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Oct 3, 2022

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

0.0% 0.0% Coverage
0.0% 0.0% Duplication

Copy link
Collaborator

@csviri csviri left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Added just a question to clarify, othewise LGTM

this.kubernetesClient = kubernetesClient;
this.kubernetesClient = kubernetesClient != null ? kubernetesClient
: new KubernetesClientBuilder()
.withConfig(configurationService.getClientConfiguration()).build();
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why we want to use the config of the operator? mainly because of namespaces?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Because if there is a configuration that's explicitly provided, one has to assume that that's what people want to use instead of the default configuration.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ahhh, sorry misread a part, sure, make sense.

@metacosm metacosm merged commit efd47da into main Oct 5, 2022
@metacosm metacosm deleted the fix-junit-extension branch October 5, 2022 11:24
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.

2 participants