Skip to content
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

feat!: set wdqs concept URI #771

Open
wants to merge 17 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

feat!: set wdqs concept URI #771

wants to merge 17 commits into from

Conversation

rti
Copy link
Contributor

@rti rti commented Sep 26, 2024

Allow setting the concept URI of entities in WDQS explicitly and distinct from the hostname used to contact wikibase.

This also fixes the problem WDQS not accepting entities when the wikibase host had a DNS name different from wikibase (which should be always the case, because wikibase is not a FQDN).

Note: In deploy, items and properties in WDQS will now have the public wikibase hostname with https protocol as prefix. E.g. https://wikibase.example/

Related:

BREAKING CHANGE: env var WIKIBASE_CONCEPT_URI now mandatory to run wdqs updater

Allow setting the concept URI of entities in WDQS explicitly and
distinct from the hostname used to contact wikibase.

This allows the concept URI to be a public URI while the wikibase
hostname is the docker network internal hostname used to poll for
updates.

BREAKING CHANGE: env var WIKIBASE_CONCEPT_URI now mandatory to run image
Sets the WIKIBASE_CONCEPT_URI required by WDQS. #771

BREAKING CHANGE: changes the concept URI used in WDQS
@rti rti requested a review from a team September 26, 2024 15:51
@rti rti changed the title feat(wdqs)!: allow setting of concept URI feat!: set wdqs concept URI Sep 30, 2024
@rti rti marked this pull request as draft October 1, 2024 19:52
@rti rti marked this pull request as ready for review October 2, 2024 12:59
Copy link
Contributor

@lorenjohnson lorenjohnson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This looks like it should go forward, and would be nice to backport. However, given the major versioning to 1.x and 2.x issue we've been talking about I wonder if there is any sensible way to maintain the current way it functions (even if not optimal or broken) so that it can be a minor release? 🤷🏼‍♂️

@rti
Copy link
Contributor Author

rti commented Oct 9, 2024

How to handle this versioning, as discussed today with @lorenjohnson

WDQS bumps a major version

  • because the interface changes the API in a breaking way
  • it has a new required environment variable

Deploy bumps a patch

  • deploy bumps to WDQS 2 under the hood
  • provides the required variable to WDQS
  • for the user, the interface / API of deploy does not change

TODO

  • clean up commit messages to signify correct version bumps to deploy and WDQS projects
  • do not squash merge, use merge commits

@rti
Copy link
Contributor Author

rti commented Oct 9, 2024

holding back for #782

@lorenjohnson lorenjohnson self-requested a review October 9, 2024 08:11
Copy link
Contributor

@lorenjohnson lorenjohnson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

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