Skip to content

chore: Preparing for release #229

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 5 commits into from
Dec 17, 2019
Merged

chore: Preparing for release #229

merged 5 commits into from
Dec 17, 2019

Conversation

aliabbasrizvi
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

aliabbasrizvi and others added 5 commits November 13, 2019 17:40
…es. (#227)

* refactor batch_event_processor to reset deadline after it passes. Also, hang on queue with timeout at flush interval

* fix lint error

* lint

* fix lint error

* finally got to debug replacing the mock logger

* update to take time in float

* add unit tests for float flush deadline and flush interval

* fix broken test

* update method description

* added a unit test to make sure processor is called once during flush interval

* lint error
* add more debug logging

* take out in seconds. already in seconds

* Revert "take out in seconds. already in seconds"

This reverts commit 9c0cca8.

* update logging to log when batch is empty on flush or flush of batch size

* use mock logger

* rename flush_queue to flush_batch and update debug messages. fix one bug where current_batch was being reset without a lock.

* cleanup incorrect comments
* Bumping version for release

* Updating CHANGELOG

* add debug pr to list for change log
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.04%) to 97.604% when pulling d57e068 on master into 955712b on 3.3.x.

3 similar comments
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.04%) to 97.604% when pulling d57e068 on master into 955712b on 3.3.x.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.04%) to 97.604% when pulling d57e068 on master into 955712b on 3.3.x.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.04%) to 97.604% when pulling d57e068 on master into 955712b on 3.3.x.

@thomaszurkan-optimizely
Copy link
Contributor

Can we release off of master?

Copy link
Contributor

@mikeproeng37 mikeproeng37 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Releasing here should be fine. But we should standardize in releasing from master in the near future for releases that are current with master

@aliabbasrizvi aliabbasrizvi merged commit f8e363d into 3.3.x Dec 17, 2019
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.

4 participants