Skip to content

Conversation

@quinntaylormitchell
Copy link
Collaborator

@quinntaylormitchell quinntaylormitchell commented Oct 17, 2025

Description

WIP

Checklist

  • The PR satisfies the contribution guidelines.
  • This is a breaking change and that has been indicated in the PR title, OR this isn't a
    breaking change.
  • Necessary docs have been updated, OR no docs need to be updated.

Validation performed

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 17, 2025

Important

Review skipped

Draft detected.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

Copy link
Contributor

@Bill-hbrhbr Bill-hbrhbr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks pretty good for a first draft. Still, I feel like quite a bit of refactoring will be needed, and I will def take a closer look at everything after the testing infra migrates a bit.

Some points of importance:

  1. There's definitely no need to modify an existing clp_config.yaml in place. We could keep clp config JSON objects in memory, and dump them into either temp files or log files when we pass them to the package start up script.
  2. For clp config JSON object, we can see if we can maximize the amount of stuff we can reuse in (clp_config.py)[https://github.com/y-scope/clp/blob/94b501b264ab376e2c917fa47b61dd91fca50132/components/clp-py-utils/clp_py_utils/clp_config.py#L28]
  3. See which fixture scope the package instance should assume. You can find the list here. Personally, I believe the module (per-file) scope is the best.
  4. We need new taskfile tasks to automate the new package tests. But we can address that when doing final touch ups.
  5. Misc discussion points that you can find in my individual comments. Let me know if you disagree with whatever I've posted or have better solutions.

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.

2 participants