Allow explicit passing of plural name to new_class instead of suffix #403
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Reverts #392
Closes #402
In #392 I added support for specifying the
plural_suffix
innew_class
. This was done because previously it just assumed the plural form added ans
suffix (pod
=>pods
). In #391 an example was given where the suffix should bees
(ec2nodeclass
=>ec2nodeclasses
), so I added the ability to modify the suffix.However since then I found an example where we don't simply add a suffix, but instead replace the last letter with a suffix (
policy
=>policies
).This PR reverts the ability to modify the suffix and instead gives the ability to specify the entire plural. This makes things less "clever" and hopefully solves other edge cases we haven't thought of yet.
Plural is still optional though, and if you omit it then we just assume the plural form appends an
s
to the singular.This change is slightly breaking because I opted to replace the
plural_suffix
with justplural
rather than allow both. But the impact should be low because it is a very new addition and I expect few users will have adopted it.