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

feat: add unique service instance identifiers to router #409

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

Conversation

piksel
Copy link
Member

@piksel piksel commented Nov 5, 2023

No description provided.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 5, 2023

Codecov Report

Attention: 8 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (3428e5e) 79.12% compared to head (7b2ae29) 79.12%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #409   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   79.12%   79.12%           
=======================================
  Files         102      102           
  Lines        4488     4503   +15     
=======================================
+ Hits         3551     3563   +12     
- Misses        758      760    +2     
- Partials      179      180    +1     
Files Coverage Δ
pkg/router/router.go 67.81% <79.48%> (+1.14%) ⬆️

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@favonia
Copy link
Contributor

favonia commented Nov 5, 2023

Thank you! In case it helps, it's okay for my application to show duplicate service names. However, I can also see why you want to make them distinct! 😃

@favonia
Copy link
Contributor

favonia commented Nov 5, 2023

Alternative approach: maybe in 1.0 API, there could be an API returning the list of services directly, and each service must implement a function showing a name. The ServiceRouter is then closer to a "composite" service that can queue messages and do AsyncSend.

PS: I want to emphasize that I can use the current library as it is just fine, in case you think more discussions could be helpful. 😁 Thank you for your quick response.

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