Skip to content

Conversation

@lakshmi-kannan
Copy link
Contributor

What?

Timer is not a sensor anymore. It would now be part of st2 process (rules_engine for now but we can move if needed)

Things fixed

  • st2reactor/contrib doesn't exist anymore as webhook and timers are now moved.
  • Registration of system trigger models now happen programatically (in webhook controller and st2timer) as opposed to bootstrap script based registration.
  • Also with this PR, I refactored st2reactor/container/utils and moved trigger type creation method to st2common/services/triggers so it can be shared.

TODO

@Kami
Copy link
Member

Kami commented Dec 16, 2014

Nice - going forward, under which service / where the timer will run?

@lakshmi-kannan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Nice - going forward, under which service / where the timer will run?

I am thinking RulesEngine. Thoughts?

@Kami
Copy link
Member

Kami commented Dec 17, 2014

@lakshmi-kannan Honestly not sure aka haven't decided yet what's the best place for it.

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 have no idea what this test was trying to achieve. I removed this test. Let me know if anyone has objections.

@lakshmi-kannan lakshmi-kannan changed the title WIP: Timer should not be sensor RFR: Timer should not be sensor Dec 18, 2014
@lakshmi-kannan
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Kami For now, I put the timer in rules_engine. We can change this later if needed.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sweet, we can finally get rid of this "hack" - we just need to make sure we never put any sensors in the core pack otherwise it's going to break (we won't detect those sensors).

@Kami
Copy link
Member

Kami commented Dec 18, 2014

After a quick pass it looks good, but we also need to add test cases for it.

And I also want to test it before merging to make sure we aren't introducing any regressions.

@lakshmi-kannan
Copy link
Contributor Author

After a quick pass it looks good, but we also need to add test cases for it.

Do you mean the timer? I am planning to add some. Was thinking another PR. Let me get started on that.

@Kami
Copy link
Member

Kami commented Dec 18, 2014

@lakshmi-kannan Yep and ideally we would do it in this PR :)

@lakshmi-kannan
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Kami https://github.com/StackStorm/st2/pull/921/files (opened a PR against this PR inception style)

@lakshmi-kannan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Let's see if I can resolve the merge conflict and get this merged today. Challenge accepted.

@lakshmi-kannan lakshmi-kannan deleted the timer_should_not_be_sensor branch December 20, 2014 00:03
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.

3 participants