-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 61
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
Ability to upload to Generic Packages Repository #524
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
@meziantou I have opened this as draft, based on the comments that you have made here: I would love to get some feedback on what I have done here, and what changes/suggestions you could make. This is quite a naive implementation based on my own needs, and the information that I could find here: Thanks! |
That's a good start! I've added some comments, but the shape is ok |
e356b33
to
90326d8
Compare
throw new System.NotImplementedException(); | ||
} | ||
|
||
public IEnumerable<PackageSearchResult> Get(int projectId, PackageQuery packageQuery) |
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.
@meziantou I couldn't see any prior art for returning an IEnumerable<T>
in any of the existing clients. Happy to make a change here, just wanted to make sure that we are on the same page before making any changes.
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.
Other implementations use GitLabCollectionResponse<T>
. This supports sync and async enumeration!
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.
Ooo! Missed that one! Will get that fixed up just now!
@meziantou I have taken a stab at making the changes that you suggested, and I have implemented a couple more methods on the new PackageClient for Side Question... Should I create an issue for this feature addition, or assuming that we move forward with this, are you ok to merge the PR directly, without an associated issue? |
90326d8
to
cf00481
Compare
public class Package | ||
{ | ||
[JsonPropertyName("id")] | ||
public int Id { get; set; } |
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.
New classes should use long
for ids
public int Id { get; set; } | |
public long Id { get; set; } |
public int Id { get; set; } | ||
|
||
[JsonPropertyName("package_id")] | ||
public int PackageId { get; set; } |
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.
public int PackageId { get; set; } | |
public long PackageId { get; set; } |
public DateTime? UpdatedAt { get; set; } | ||
|
||
[JsonPropertyName("size")] | ||
public int Size { get; set; } |
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.
File size is a long. I'm not sure GitLab would allow such big files, but you never know
public int Size { get; set; } | |
public long Size { get; set; } |
public int FileStore { get; set; } | ||
|
||
[JsonPropertyName("file_md5")] | ||
public string FileMD5 { get; set; } |
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.
public string FileMD5 { get; set; } | |
public string FileMd5 { get; set; } |
public string FileMD5 { get; set; } | ||
|
||
[JsonPropertyName("file_sha1")] | ||
public string FileSHA1 { get; set; } |
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.
public string FileSHA1 { get; set; } | |
public string FileSha1 { get; set; } |
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ | |||
namespace NGitLab.Models | |||
{ | |||
public enum PackageStatus |
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.
Use C# name (e.g. Default
) and the EnumMember(Value = "")]
attribute to map the actual name
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.
Happy to make this change, but I am curious what your suggestion is when it comes to things like this:
url = Utils.AddParameter(url, "status", query.Status);
i.e. when using the Enum value to construct the URL that is requested. With the change that you have suggested in play, the constructed URL doesn't work, as the GitLab server returns an error...
Any suggestions?
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.
@meziantou just wanted to follow up on this one. Any ideas on the best course of action here? Thanks!
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.
Sorry for the delay. I think the best solution is to improve Utils.AddParameter
to better support enums:
public static string AddParameter<T>(string url, string parameterName, T value)
{
if (typeof(T).IsEnum)
{
// TODO
// Note: ReflectionExtensions.GetEnumMappings can be used as an example
}
return Equals(value, null) ? url : AddParameterInternal(url, parameterName, value.ToString());
}
{ | ||
public enum PackageType | ||
{ | ||
all, |
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.
Use C# name (e.g. Default
) and the EnumMember(Value = "")]
attribute to map the actual name
{ | ||
public enum PackageSort | ||
{ | ||
asc, |
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.
Use C# name (e.g. Default
) and the EnumMember(Value = "")]
attribute to map the actual name
_api = api; | ||
} | ||
|
||
public Task<Package> PublishAsync(int projectId, PackagePublish packagePublish, CancellationToken cancellationToken = default) |
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.
Based on the url, I think the method name should be PublishGenericPackageAsync
public Task<Package> PublishAsync(int projectId, PackagePublish packagePublish, CancellationToken cancellationToken = default) | |
public Task<Package> PublishGenericPackageAsync(int projectId, PackagePublish packagePublish, CancellationToken cancellationToken = default) |
PackageName = "Packages", | ||
PackageVersion = "1.0.0", | ||
Status = "default", | ||
PackageStream = File.OpenRead("../../../../README.md"), |
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.
You'll need to dispose the stream. Also, don't rely on the file system, you can use a MemoryStream
to create a dummy content.
No need to create an issue |
Sorry for barging in, but I was actually looking into adding support for GitLab's package registry to NGitLab myself when I saw there is already an open PR. Is there anything I can do to complete this? I'd be happy to help out |
I keep trying to get back to the PR, but I just haven't had the cycles to do it yet From memory, all that was remaining was some re-work for the tests to not depend on file system directly. If you have some time, I have no objections to you creating a PR into my fork, and then I can update this PR. |
Great, I'll see what I can do |
No description provided.