Skip to content

support matching on other state during state change #98

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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
snowp merged 1 commit into from
Dec 9, 2025
Merged

support matching on other state during state change #98

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 4 additions & 0 deletions src/bitdrift_public/protobuf/workflow/v1/workflow.proto
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -161,6 +161,10 @@ message Workflow {

// The match condition which is applied to the new value of the state during a state change.
state.v1.StateValueMatch new_value = 4 [(validate.rules).message = {required: true}];

// Additional properties that must be true at the time of the state change for the rule to match.
// Since state changes do not match against a particular log, tags and messages will not be visibile to this matcher.
matcher.v1.LogMatcher log_matcher = 5;
Comment on lines +165 to +167
Copy link
Contributor

@mattklein123 mattklein123 Dec 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Agree this makes sense. It's kind of odd that we use the LogMatcher when we can only match on a part of it. Not sure if it's worth somehow factoring this out while it's still possible? If it's hard not a big deal.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@snowp snowp Dec 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I could do another tree structure with new matcher lists etc but not sure if it's worth the complexity just for stronger typing, figured we could validate this during conversion and call it a day?

}

// An action to be taken when moving to a new state.
Expand Down
Loading