Skip to content
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

schema: add source workflows #512

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

oliver-sanders
Copy link
Member

Add source workflows to the schema.

Unblocks cylc/cylc-ui#548, though we will probably want to extend this to subscriptions for that.

Check List

  • I have read CONTRIBUTING.md and added my name as a Code Contributor.
  • Contains logically grouped changes (else tidy your branch by rebase).
  • Does not contain off-topic changes (use other PRs for other changes).
  • Applied any dependency changes to both setup.cfg (and conda-environment.yml if present).
  • Tests are included (or explain why tests are not needed).
  • CHANGES.md entry included if this is a change that can affect users
  • Cylc-Doc pull request opened if required at cylc/cylc-doc/pull/XXXX.
  • If this is a bug fix, PR should be raised against the relevant ?.?.x branch.

@dwsutherland
Copy link
Member

Looks fine, tests passing.
Probably would need to create this on the cylc-flow end to add to subscriptions (which might make more sense, as field(s) in a data-store).

@hjoliver
Copy link
Member

Is that a formal review/approval @dwsutherland ?

@oliver-sanders
Copy link
Member Author

Getting this into subscriptions would make sense, making it easier for cylc-ui views to access this information.

Would we have to add these fields in cylc-flow or could we shim them into cylc-uiserver similar to how we extend the GraphQL schema?

@dwsutherland
Copy link
Member

dwsutherland commented Oct 25, 2023

Would we have to add these fields in cylc-flow or could we shim them into cylc-uiserver similar to how we extend the GraphQL schema?

Well, if we add this to the cylc-flow schema then:

  • it will be available both ends (schd and UIS)
  • we may not need to figure it out if the Scheduler already knows (i.e. the resolver code here)
  • and if it's a workflow field of the data-store, then it's automatically in the subscriptions

@oliver-sanders
Copy link
Member Author

Because this is UIS specific functionality that the Scheduler should never know about it would be better to try and keep this logic centralised in cylc-uiserver. Is is possible to extend the protobuf schema in a similar way to how we extend the GraphQL schema?

@dwsutherland
Copy link
Member

Ah, so it's not about knowing the source of installed/running workflows, it's about knowing cylc-src or it's aliases...

Yeah, better to keep it at UIS then, and we shouldn't need to deal with protobuf .. can just extend the subscriptions at the UIS

@oliver-sanders
Copy link
Member Author

Ok, I'll look into doing that. Would it be possible to extend the store to hold this or would I need to add a parallel store?

@oliver-sanders oliver-sanders marked this pull request as draft October 26, 2023 09:26
@oliver-sanders
Copy link
Member Author

(may as well draft this until the fields are available in subscriptions)

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