Naming conventions #47
Conversation
|
Important Review skippedDraft detected. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the You can disable this status message by setting the ✨ Finishing touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
|
|
||
| | Concept | Code (Type) | URL/Config | Plural | Database Table | | ||
| |---------|-------------|------------|--------|----------------| | ||
| | Cluster | `Cluster` | `cluster` | `clusters` | `clusters` | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I really feel, we should be calling it a hosted cluster, following what we are actually provisioning. I really dont like cluster as it leaves too much room for interpretation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I can see that for us (dev teams, BU) it may have more meaning using HostedCluster, but..
What would make the most sense to customers?
Does it bring value for them to name it HostedCluster instead of Cluster?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We are just an API, how it gets wrapped and presented by the client is up to the users. I really worry that if we are not strongly locked to what a hosted cluster is we will fall into the same trap as OCM did
|
|
||
| | Component Type | Suffix | Interface Name | Implementation | Package | | ||
| |----------------|--------|----------------|----------------|---------| | ||
| | Service layer | `Service` | `ClusterService` | `sqlClusterService` | `pkg/services/` | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same as above, really feel we need to be pushing on HostedClusterService
| <summary>Complete Table Schema Example</summary> | ||
|
|
||
| ```sql | ||
| CREATE TABLE clusters ( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Off topic, but I noticed in the API we are not using Gorm conventions for creating tables and instead using tx.Exec for raw sql, is there are reason for this?
|
Nice work @rh-amarin . Although it's a draft, besides the comments from @ciaranRoche regarding using HostedCluster fo examples, this LTGM. |
3 participants
This PR documents how to name different concerns for the different Hyperfleet components.