-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 63
update SDK for demo #1665
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
update SDK for demo #1665
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
Summary of ChangesHello @toddbaert, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request updates the OpenFeature SDK dependency to a fixed version Highlights
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Code Review
This pull request updates the OpenFeature SDK dependency in the parent pom.xml from a version range to a fixed version (1.19.1). My review focuses on the implications of this change. While pinning a version improves build reproducibility, it reduces flexibility for consumers of the libraries in this repository. I've added a comment to discuss this trade-off and suggest either updating a related XML comment for consistency if the version pinning is intentional, or reverting to a version range to maintain compatibility flexibility.
| <artifactId>sdk</artifactId> | ||
| <!-- 1.16.0 <= v < 2.0 (excluding 2.0 pre-releases)--> | ||
| <version>[1.16.0,1.99999)</version> | ||
| <version>1.19.1</version> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Pinning the sdk dependency to a specific version reduces flexibility for consumers. For a library ecosystem, it's generally better to use a version range to declare compatibility with a range of SDK versions that a consuming application might provide.
- If this change is intentional and permanent, please update the comment on line 103, as it's now inconsistent with the fixed version.
- If flexibility is desired, please consider reverting to a version range. The standard Maven range would be
[1.16.0,2.0.0). The previous[1.16.0,1.99999)was likely a way to exclude pre-releases of 2.0, which is also a valid approach.
For future consideration, managing this version via a Maven property could offer a good balance of control and flexibility for child modules.
Demo for issue