Skip to content

goreplay-cli package #1148

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 4 commits into from
Jan 12, 2023
Merged

goreplay-cli package #1148

merged 4 commits into from
Jan 12, 2023

Conversation

DimaGolomozy
Copy link
Contributor

@DimaGolomozy DimaGolomozy commented Jan 2, 2023

change package from main -> goreplay
this will allow importing goreplay as a package

@buger wdyt?

@@ -266,7 +265,7 @@ func init() {

}

func checkSettings() {
func CheckSettings() {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

exported function CheckSettings should have comment or be unexported

@@ -266,7 +265,7 @@ func init() {

}

func checkSettings() {
func CheckSettings() {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

exported function CheckSettings should have comment or be unexported

@@ -266,7 +265,7 @@ func init() {

}

func checkSettings() {
func CheckSettings() {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

exported function CheckSettings should have comment or be unexported

@buger
Copy link
Owner

buger commented Jan 5, 2023

That's for sure interesting! However you made some of really useful packages internal, and if we talking about writing some "go plugins" in future, having byteutils or proto packages accessible as import can be very benificial.

@DimaGolomozy
Copy link
Contributor Author

That's for sure interesting! However you made some of really useful packages internal, and if we talking about writing some "go plugins" in future, having byteutils or proto packages accessible as import can be very benificial.

I guess the proto can go out of internal.
About byteutils, isn't more internal helpers to do stuff on bytes? Do you really want to expose it?

@buger
Copy link
Owner

buger commented Jan 10, 2023

I see, makes sense. If in future it will be needed, most likely it will be needed indirectly by exposing more human friendly interface. in this case lets make "proto" package open, and we can merge.

@DimaGolomozy
Copy link
Contributor Author

I see, makes sense. If in future it will be needed, most likely it will be needed indirectly by exposing more human friendly interface. in this case lets make "proto" package open, and we can merge.

done

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

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 21 Code Smells

No Coverage information No Coverage information
0.7% 0.7% Duplication

@buger
Copy link
Owner

buger commented Jan 12, 2023

Looks good!

@buger buger merged commit 4094683 into buger:master Jan 12, 2023
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.

3 participants