Skip to content

Conversation

@enykeev
Copy link
Member

@enykeev enykeev commented Nov 25, 2016

It is my impression that this filter is mainly used to produce readable representation of the object. Unless default_flow_style is strictly defined, yaml dumper would pick the one it seem appropriate producing quite different formatting for pretty similar kind of input.

Flow style

{author: st2-dev, description: StackStorm pack management, email: [email protected],
    name: st2, version: 0.1.2}

vs block style

author: st2-dev
description: st2 content pack containing github integrations
email: [email protected]
keywords:
- github
- git
- scm
name: github
version: 0.4.0

@emedvedev
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Nov 25, 2016

Current coverage is 77.15% (diff: 100%)

Merging #3051 into master will increase coverage by 0.25%

@@             master      #3051   diff @@
==========================================
  Files           430        430          
  Lines         21997      21997          
  Methods           0          0          
  Messages          0          0          
  Branches          0          0          
==========================================
+ Hits          16914      16970    +56   
+ Misses         5083       5027    -56   
  Partials          0          0          
Diff Coverage File Path
•••••••••• 100% st2common/st2common/jinja/filters/data.py

Powered by Codecov. Last update 02e3c95...cbd6097

@arm4b
Copy link
Member

arm4b commented Nov 25, 2016

@Kami
Copy link
Member

Kami commented Nov 25, 2016

Good catch - LGTM, 👍

(we already do this in some places, but yeah it's a good idea to do it everywhere and be consistent)

@Kami Kami merged commit 7d0d95c into master Nov 28, 2016
@Kami Kami deleted the fix/jinja_filter_flow_style branch November 28, 2016 15:26
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.

6 participants