Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 31, 2023. It is now read-only.

Use res_id instead task_id in ResourceManager #3942

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Mar 13, 2019
Merged

Use res_id instead task_id in ResourceManager #3942

merged 5 commits into from
Mar 13, 2019

Conversation

badb
Copy link
Contributor

@badb badb commented Mar 1, 2019

This one will be needed if we want to introduce resources per subtask and not just per task.
res_id is used instead of task_id in Resource, ResourceStorage, ResourceManager and ResourceServer.
That way function names and arguments are more universal and we will be able to use them for subtasks resources, additional resources etc.

@ghost ghost assigned badb Mar 1, 2019
@badb badb changed the title [Wip] Use res_id instead task_id in ResourceManager Use res_id instead task_id in ResourceManager Mar 5, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@shadeofblue shadeofblue left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

looks good as far as I could tell :)

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 11, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #3942 into develop will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is 89.07%.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #3942      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    87.77%   87.73%   -0.05%     
===========================================
  Files          216      216              
  Lines        18977    18966      -11     
===========================================
- Hits         16658    16640      -18     
- Misses        2319     2326       +7

@badb badb merged commit c5dc191 into develop Mar 13, 2019
@ghost ghost removed the needs review label Mar 13, 2019
@badb badb deleted the res_id branch March 13, 2019 10:05
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants