feat: introduce v2 client with new method signatures #543
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
dwsupplee
force-pushed
the
sig_updates_new_client
branch
2 times, most recently
from
921ca26 to
d6c1536
Compare
dwsupplee
force-pushed
the
sig_updates_new_client
branch
from
d6c1536 to
f5b5852
Compare
|
The remaining failing tests are due to lack of formatting methods in the v2 gapics, which we will be tagging on with some new work @noahdietz is doing. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR includes the changes in #542. Once that is merged I'll update here and the diff should clean up a little bit.
I opted to dupe a bit of the code between the unit test/gapic generators into the "V2" based classes in lieu of engineering out something more DRY for the following reasons:
Open to discussion on this if anyone feels like that wasn't the right call 👍 .
I'll update the goldens for the integration tests once #542 / #540 are merged.
Please note, don't take the way the new client looks as final (e.g., the base client is still a class and not abstract) - still plenty of room for discussion on how we want that to look. The primary purpose of this PR is to move forward with how the new signatures will look/work.