Skip to content

Example 5: PeeringDB to Nautobot example #81

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

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Dec 14, 2021

Conversation

chadell
Copy link
Collaborator

@chadell chadell commented Nov 16, 2021

Contributing with this example: https://github.com/chadell/playground-diffsync

glennmatthews
glennmatthews previously approved these changes Nov 17, 2021
@chadell
Copy link
Collaborator Author

chadell commented Nov 21, 2021

@glennmatthews , I am not sure if the example is good for the CI, because it is actually updating the demo.nautobot.com at every run (it creates some sites and regions)... I leave at your criteria
BTW, do not merge it before 29 of November, I'm doing a workshop with the library and I prefer to not include this example already 😄

@glennmatthews
Copy link
Collaborator

glennmatthews commented Nov 22, 2021

Good thought. Maybe make the main.py (which it looks like you may not have committed to Git?) only run up to the diff.summary() and not perform the final sync_from() step?

Or alternately maybe we should leave this out of the CI altogether since it's not self-contained but is interacting with external systems. That might be wiser.

@chadell
Copy link
Collaborator Author

chadell commented Nov 22, 2021

Yes, I believe that in this case is wiser to skip the test as being dependent on external systems. I added the main.py as reference

glennmatthews
glennmatthews previously approved these changes Nov 23, 2021
dgarros
dgarros previously approved these changes Nov 30, 2021
Copy link
Contributor

@dgarros dgarros left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me overall,
it's not a blocker but I think if we should leverage pynautobot whenever possible, it makes the code cleaner.

@chadell
Copy link
Collaborator Author

chadell commented Nov 30, 2021

Looks good to me overall, it's not a blocker but I think if we should leverage pynautobot whenever possible, it makes the code cleaner.

I did it this way to avoid the extra dependency

@dgarros
Copy link
Contributor

dgarros commented Nov 30, 2021

I did it this way to avoid the extra dependency

That's a good reminder that we should be consistent here
for the other examples, we didn't add the dependencies to the pyproject.toml, instead we have a requirements.txt file in the example directory

I'm good either way but we should be consistent

@glennmatthews what is your preference ?

Copy link
Contributor

@dgarros dgarros left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@chadell please can you remove the changes from the pyproject.toml and add a requirements.txt file in your example directory to align with the other examples

@chadell
Copy link
Collaborator Author

chadell commented Dec 14, 2021

@chadell please can you remove the changes from the pyproject.toml and add a requirements.txt file in your example directory to align with the other examples

The requirements.txt file is already present. the changes in pyproject.toml should not be there, will remove.

@chadell chadell dismissed stale reviews from dgarros and glennmatthews via afbf048 December 14, 2021 05:06
Copy link
Contributor

@dgarros dgarros left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you @chadell

@dgarros dgarros merged commit 53d6095 into networktocode:main Dec 14, 2021
@chadell chadell deleted the example-peeringdb branch December 14, 2021 16:30
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