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

refactor(engine): Remove StreamProcessorLifecycleAware from TypedRecordProcessor #9736

Merged

Conversation

pihme
Copy link
Contributor

@pihme pihme commented Jul 7, 2022

Description

  • Removes the StreamProcessorLifecycleAware interface from TypedRecordProcessor. Turns out, none of the record processors implemented these methods
  • This will make the engine abstraction easier, because then the new engine does not need to be listener and relay for those events
  • Tests were simplified accordingly. I think this deserves most attention in the review. Maybe some tests are now obsolete altogether 🤔

Related issues

related to #9725

Definition of Done

Not all items need to be done depending on the issue and the pull request.

Code changes:

  • The changes are backwards compatibility with previous versions
  • If it fixes a bug then PRs are created to backport the fix to the last two minor versions. You can trigger a backport by assigning labels (e.g. backport stable/1.3) to the PR, in case that fails you need to create backports manually.

Testing:

  • There are unit/integration tests that verify all acceptance criterias of the issue
  • New tests are written to ensure backwards compatibility with further versions
  • The behavior is tested manually
  • The change has been verified by a QA run
  • The impact of the changes is verified by a benchmark

Documentation:

  • The documentation is updated (e.g. BPMN reference, configuration, examples, get-started guides, etc.)
  • New content is added to the release announcement
  • If the PR changes how BPMN processes are validated (e.g. support new BPMN element) then the Camunda modeling team should be informed to adjust the BPMN linting.

Please refer to our review guidelines.

@pihme pihme requested a review from saig0 July 7, 2022 16:26
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jul 7, 2022

Unit Test Results

   787 files  ±  0     787 suites  ±0   1h 37m 21s ⏱️ + 6m 17s
5 931 tests  - 50  5 924 ✔️  - 50  7 💤 ±0  0 ±0 
6 100 runs   - 50  6 093 ✔️  - 50  7 💤 ±0  0 ±0 

Results for commit 3af6bd2. ± Comparison against base commit 6719c6b.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

Copy link
Member

@Zelldon Zelldon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice find! LGTM please have a short look at my comments

@pihme pihme removed the request for review from saig0 July 8, 2022 08:44
@pihme pihme force-pushed the 9725-remove-lifecycle-listener-from-processors branch from 8fcfa8c to 3af6bd2 Compare July 8, 2022 08:52
…rdProcessor

None of the processors implemented the lifecycle callbacks.
@pihme pihme force-pushed the 9725-remove-lifecycle-listener-from-processors branch from 3af6bd2 to a8071c1 Compare July 8, 2022 09:21
@pihme
Copy link
Contributor Author

pihme commented Jul 8, 2022

bors merge

@zeebe-bors-camunda
Copy link
Contributor

Build succeeded:

@zeebe-bors-camunda zeebe-bors-camunda bot merged commit c578bc9 into main Jul 8, 2022
@zeebe-bors-camunda zeebe-bors-camunda bot deleted the 9725-remove-lifecycle-listener-from-processors branch July 8, 2022 09:36
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.

None yet

2 participants