Closed TebaleloS closed 2 months ago
Overall Project | 72.06% -23.65% |
:green_apple: |
---|---|---|
Files changed | 73.64% | :x: |
File | Coverage | |
---|---|---|
BaseRepository.scala | 100% | :green_apple: |
PartitioningRepositoryImpl.scala | 100% | :green_apple: |
PartitioningControllerImpl.scala | 100% | :green_apple: |
BaseController.scala | 100% | :green_apple: |
PartitioningServiceImpl.scala | 100% | :green_apple: |
BaseService.scala | 100% | :green_apple: |
CheckpointFromDB.scala | 85.83% -308.66% |
:x: |
PlayJsonImplicits.scala | 54.84% | :green_apple: |
GetPartitioningCheckpoints.scala | 54.55% -56.36% |
:x: |
Overall Project | 60.76% -38.65% |
:green_apple: |
---|---|---|
Files changed | 0% | :x: |
File | Coverage | |
---|---|---|
CheckpointQueryDTO.scala | 0% -1385.71% |
:x: |
Overall Project | 86.3% | :green_apple: |
---|
There is no coverage information present for the Files changed
Looks good to me, review finished, just 1 minor thing, kind of consistency reasons; no other remarks outside of that, happy to approve soon!
There are inconsistent namings. I would personally use getPartitioningCheckpoints everywhere (sometimes you use getPartitioningMeasures instead).
Absolutely, I support this idea. However, I think this PR (and few others) has been here for far too long, and we know that we already have some technical debt in endpoint/operation namings, plus we need to update the agent to support some of the missing operations (especially those for v2).
I'll approve now as I think that it's complete from my PoV.
CheckpointQuery
andCheckpointFromDB
as input and output types for the partitioning checkpoint operation.checkpointDTO
.closes #190