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

chore(connector_ops): remove unused scripts #36714

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 4, 2024

Conversation

natikgadzhi
Copy link
Contributor

What

Part 1 or https://github.com/airbytehq/airbyte-internal-issues/issues/6897 — removes two unused scripts from airbyte-ci/connector_ops.

@natikgadzhi natikgadzhi self-assigned this Apr 1, 2024
@natikgadzhi natikgadzhi requested a review from a team April 1, 2024 02:24
Copy link

vercel bot commented Apr 1, 2024

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

1 Ignored Deployment
Name Status Preview Updated (UTC)
airbyte-docs ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Apr 1, 2024 2:24am

Copy link
Contributor

@erohmensing erohmensing left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@natikgadzhi just to be clear, the reason we're getting rid of these is because these checks are already covered in CAT right? I think we still want to check these things, maybe we're not using the scripts anymore though.

@natikgadzhi
Copy link
Contributor Author

natikgadzhi commented Apr 3, 2024

@erohmensing in spirit, I agree we probably want to keep these checks. I don't see them as CATs today (but maybe I'm holding them wrong).

In connectors_qa, I see we're reusing metadata_service/lib validators, specifically this:

But alas, I don't see specific checks for allowedHosts and acceptance tests strictness. I don't understand the latter much, but former seems to be a required option.

What do you think we should do? Want me to add a validator that allowedHosts are defined and contain at least one valid host? Should it be this PR or a separate issue?

@erohmensing
Copy link
Contributor

@natikgadzhi I think there are allowed hosts checks here. I don't think I see anywhere where "x connector must have high strictness level" is implemented - @alafanechere might know more. We might be able to remove this concept in favor of quality level now, if we wanted

Copy link
Contributor

@alafanechere alafanechere left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I believe check-test-strictness-level was used to validate a GA (certified) connector strictness level was set to high.
I'm not sure when / how / why it got removed. But if we really need it it's something I'd definitely check in connectors-qa (as allowed-host).

@natikgadzhi
Copy link
Contributor Author

Okay than I'm merging this and taking a note to create a todo for the strictness level check. I don't know if we really believe in it.

@natikgadzhi natikgadzhi merged commit 5121937 into master Apr 4, 2024
31 checks passed
@natikgadzhi natikgadzhi deleted the ng/connector_ops/remove-unused-checks branch April 4, 2024 20:55
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.

3 participants