Skip to content

Conversation

@snowp
Copy link
Contributor

@snowp snowp commented Dec 9, 2025

No description provided.

Comment on lines +165 to +167
// Additional properties that must be true at the time of the state change for the rule to match.
// Since state changes do not match against a particular log, tags and messages will not be visibile to this matcher.
matcher.v1.LogMatcher log_matcher = 5;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Agree this makes sense. It's kind of odd that we use the LogMatcher when we can only match on a part of it. Not sure if it's worth somehow factoring this out while it's still possible? If it's hard not a big deal.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I could do another tree structure with new matcher lists etc but not sure if it's worth the complexity just for stronger typing, figured we could validate this during conversion and call it a day?

@snowp snowp merged commit 8cdf0f8 into main Dec 9, 2025
2 checks passed
@snowp snowp deleted the support-matching-other-state branch December 9, 2025 18:58
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 9, 2025
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.

3 participants