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

Service Integrations (specify integrations in smithy-build.json) #142

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

alextwoods
Copy link
Contributor

Description of changes:
Allows integrations to be specified in the smithy-build.json using a new integration config. This allows service specific integrations - but doesn't limit the flexibility of the includeFor for plugins that need to inspect the model (eg, integrations that check for presence of a certain trait on the model).

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

@@ -75,7 +75,8 @@ public GenerationContext createContext(CreateContextDirective<RubySettings, Ruby
Model model = directive.model();
List<RubyIntegration> integrations = directive.integrations().stream()
.filter((integration) -> integration
.includeFor(service, model))
.includeFor(service, model)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it should be one or the other. If we still need the other approach then maybe we shouldn't do this one.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, the includeFor is much more generic and necessary for a lot of cases (eg: an integration that provides behavior for a trait where there are related config values - we don't want to add those to services that don't have the trait).

@alextwoods alextwoods closed this Jul 6, 2023
@mullermp mullermp deleted the service_integration branch July 6, 2023 16:07
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