Skip to content

new: more strict naming for service definitions#208

Merged
copybara-service[bot] merged 2 commits intogoogle:masterfrom
cryptaliagy:feature/strict_definition_naming
Aug 25, 2020
Merged

new: more strict naming for service definitions#208
copybara-service[bot] merged 2 commits intogoogle:masterfrom
cryptaliagy:feature/strict_definition_naming

Conversation

@cryptaliagy
Copy link
Contributor

Added more strict rules to service definition naming, and used these rules to infer if a token is an IP or a service during GetNet

@cryptaliagy cryptaliagy force-pushed the feature/strict_definition_naming branch from 7be16eb to 2741bcb Compare July 20, 2020 19:56
@rdsharma
Copy link
Contributor

Did we decide to abandon this one?

@cryptaliagy
Copy link
Contributor Author

We had a small conversation on whether it should still be around. I think it would be advisable to keep it but remove the strict requirement, since if we allow it as a first-pass we will still add some efficiency

@cryptaliagy cryptaliagy force-pushed the feature/strict_definition_naming branch from 2741bcb to 25dbe42 Compare August 19, 2020 14:14
@copybara-service copybara-service bot merged commit 246c791 into google:master Aug 25, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants