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

Passing the secret store as a parameter to functions #178

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 5, 2024

Conversation

ahsimb
Copy link
Collaborator

@ahsimb ahsimb commented Feb 2, 2024

closes #120

@ahsimb ahsimb added the refactoring Code improvement without behavior change label Feb 2, 2024
@ahsimb ahsimb self-assigned this Feb 2, 2024
Copy link

Check out this pull request on  ReviewNB

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.


Powered by ReviewNB

@tkilias
Copy link
Collaborator

tkilias commented Feb 2, 2024

maybe not for this PR, but I think, we should rename sb_config (sandbox_config) with something like ai_lab_config

@@ -35,6 +35,7 @@
"outputs": [],
Copy link
Collaborator

@tkilias tkilias Feb 2, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Line #119.    def _get_docker_db_action_buttions(conf: Secrets, itde_exists: bool, itde_running: bool, 

Line #119.    def _get_docker_db_action_buttons(conf: Secrets, itde_exists: bool, itde_running: bool, 



Reply via ReviewNB

@ahsimb ahsimb merged commit e5fcd8b into main Feb 5, 2024
6 checks passed
@ahsimb ahsimb deleted the refactoring/120-secret-store-as-a-parameter branch February 5, 2024 08:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
refactoring Code improvement without behavior change
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Pass the secret store object (sb_config) as a parameter to all functions that need it
2 participants