-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
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
Rename the factory methods to DecoratorAssetsDefinitionBuilder. #22400
Merged
schrockn
merged 1 commit into
master
from
rename-DecoratorAssetsDefinitionBuilder-factory-methods
Jun 12, 2024
Merged
Rename the factory methods to DecoratorAssetsDefinitionBuilder. #22400
schrockn
merged 1 commit into
master
from
rename-DecoratorAssetsDefinitionBuilder-factory-methods
Jun 12, 2024
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This was referenced Jun 9, 2024
Merged
schrockn
force-pushed
the
rename-DecoratorAssetsDefinitionBuilder-factory-methods
branch
2 times, most recently
from
June 9, 2024 17:05
87523e7
to
c0ccd1a
Compare
schrockn
force-pushed
the
rename-DecoratorAssetsDefinitionBuilder-factory-methods
branch
from
June 9, 2024 17:06
c0ccd1a
to
a4acbde
Compare
schrockn
force-pushed
the
rename-DecoratorAssetsDefinitionBuilder-factory-methods
branch
from
June 9, 2024 17:14
a4acbde
to
213e19b
Compare
schrockn
force-pushed
the
rename-DecoratorAssetsDefinitionBuilder-factory-methods
branch
from
June 9, 2024 17:15
213e19b
to
c796b75
Compare
schrockn
force-pushed
the
rename-DecoratorAssetsDefinitionBuilder-factory-methods
branch
from
June 9, 2024 18:10
c796b75
to
297e3ec
Compare
schrockn
changed the base branch from
is-iterable
to
type-test-asset-check-decorator-with-check-specs
June 9, 2024 18:10
schrockn
force-pushed
the
type-test-asset-check-decorator-with-check-specs
branch
from
June 9, 2024 18:25
2027172
to
ba07d57
Compare
schrockn
force-pushed
the
rename-DecoratorAssetsDefinitionBuilder-factory-methods
branch
from
June 9, 2024 18:26
297e3ec
to
9d2e085
Compare
This was referenced Jun 9, 2024
This was referenced Jun 10, 2024
schrockn
force-pushed
the
type-test-asset-check-decorator-with-check-specs
branch
from
June 10, 2024 12:08
ba07d57
to
b4934e3
Compare
schrockn
force-pushed
the
rename-DecoratorAssetsDefinitionBuilder-factory-methods
branch
from
June 10, 2024 12:08
9d2e085
to
cf82490
Compare
This was referenced Jun 10, 2024
sryza
approved these changes
Jun 10, 2024
schrockn
force-pushed
the
type-test-asset-check-decorator-with-check-specs
branch
from
June 12, 2024 13:35
b4934e3
to
7d1708a
Compare
schrockn
force-pushed
the
rename-DecoratorAssetsDefinitionBuilder-factory-methods
branch
from
June 12, 2024 13:35
cf82490
to
cbecf65
Compare
This was referenced Jun 12, 2024
schrockn
force-pushed
the
type-test-asset-check-decorator-with-check-specs
branch
from
June 12, 2024 14:17
7d1708a
to
976f870
Compare
Base automatically changed from
type-test-asset-check-decorator-with-check-specs
to
master
June 12, 2024 14:19
schrockn
force-pushed
the
rename-DecoratorAssetsDefinitionBuilder-factory-methods
branch
from
June 12, 2024 14:19
cbecf65
to
3eb8f75
Compare
schrockn
deleted the
rename-DecoratorAssetsDefinitionBuilder-factory-methods
branch
June 12, 2024 14:21
cmpadden
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 13, 2024
## Summary & Motivation I thought these methods would more natural, but there is decorator-specific logic that will live on for awhile, so just being explicit about it. Once in these methods then we can work on unifying the logic, but moving the asset check stuff to use these existing factory methods is just changing too much at the same time. ## How I Tested These Changes BK
danielgafni
pushed a commit
to danielgafni/dagster
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 18, 2024
…ter-io#22400) ## Summary & Motivation I thought these methods would more natural, but there is decorator-specific logic that will live on for awhile, so just being explicit about it. Once in these methods then we can work on unifying the logic, but moving the asset check stuff to use these existing factory methods is just changing too much at the same time. ## How I Tested These Changes BK
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary & Motivation
I thought these methods would more natural, but there is decorator-specific logic that will live on for awhile, so just being explicit about it.
Once in these methods then we can work on unifying the logic, but moving the asset check stuff to use these existing factory methods is just changing too much at the same time.
How I Tested These Changes
BK