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

appservice: fix slot related bugs #2388

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Mar 6, 2017
Merged

Conversation

yugangw-msft
Copy link
Contributor

Fix #1895: so people can specify that an appsetting shouldn't participate in a swap
Fix #1870: Add a short name alias for the slot parameter
Fix #1868: Help text for creating a deployment slot isn't completely clear
Fix #1867: Deployment slot list doesn't provide the actual "raw" slot name

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Mar 6, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #2388 into master will increase coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is 84.28%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2388      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage    72.2%   72.24%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         323      323              
  Lines       18098    18154      +56     
  Branches     2654     2666      +12     
==========================================
+ Hits        13068    13115      +47     
- Misses       4206     4209       +3     
- Partials      824      830       +6
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...ce/azure/cli/command_modules/appservice/_params.py 93.75% <100%> (+0.13%)
...e/azure/cli/command_modules/appservice/commands.py 93.54% <66.66%> (-3.12%)
...ice/azure/cli/command_modules/appservice/custom.py 70.52% <84.37%> (+2.07%)
...etwork/azure/cli/command_modules/network/custom.py 61.62% <0%> (-0.11%)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 5f77858...31d7f24. Read the comment docs.

@lostintangent
Copy link
Member

@yugangw-msft This looks awesome! Any thoughts on whether we could address #2316 as well? Slots feel like a key/compelling feature of web apps, and it would help a lot to reduce the typing needed to use it: az appservice web slot swap vs. az appservice web deployment slot swap.

@yugangw-msft
Copy link
Contributor Author

@lostintangent, for #2366 and couple of other related naming issues, are pending review with webapp team, and i will try to post update soon

@lostintangent
Copy link
Member

@yugangw-msft OK cool, thanks so much! This PR looks beautiful.

@@ -10,6 +10,9 @@

from ._client_factory import web_client_factory

def output_slots_In_table(slots):
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: lower case i in method name

@@ -10,6 +10,9 @@

from ._client_factory import web_client_factory

def output_slots_In_table(slots):
return [{'name': s['name'], 'status': s['state'], 'app service plan': s['appServicePlan']} for s in slots]
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Haven't seen any other table headings with spaces in.
'app service plan' -> 'appServicePlan'?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could we actually just call it "Plan"?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yep, let us go withplan, i like shorter name and we are already under the context of app service. I used app service plan simply because portal does it, but this is not a very necessary alignment we have to do

@yugangw-msft yugangw-msft merged commit d7b408a into Azure:master Mar 6, 2017
@yugangw-msft yugangw-msft deleted the webbug branch March 6, 2017 21:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants