-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
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
replace GrapheneAssetNode
isSource
with isMaterializable
#23401
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ export const AssetView = ({ | |
}; | ||
|
||
const renderPartitionsTab = () => { | ||
if (definition?.isSource) { | ||
if (!definition?.isMaterializable) { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Same note as above, I think we want isMaterializable = false specifically. Maybe another way of writing this is There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Oo thanks for catching my ignoramus javascript, will fix |
||
return <Redirect to={assetDetailsPathForKey(assetKey, {view: 'events'})} />; | ||
} | ||
|
||
|
@@ -567,11 +567,7 @@ const AssetViewPageHeaderTags = ({ | |
/> | ||
</> | ||
) : null} | ||
{definition?.isSource ? ( | ||
<Tag>Source Asset</Tag> | ||
) : !definition?.isExecutable ? ( | ||
<Tag>External Asset</Tag> | ||
) : undefined} | ||
{!definition?.isMaterializable ? <Tag>External Asset</Tag> : undefined} | ||
</> | ||
); | ||
}; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Technically this also hides it if the definition does not exist, I think in this case we may want to say
(definition && !definition.isMaterializable)
so that the!definition
case doesn't also countThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Gah I accidentally merged before fixing this. Here's a followup: #23490.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually – thinking about this more deeply after noticing a test failure on my followup PR branch, I think the expected behavior is actually that we do want to hide the tab if the definition does not exist. So I think this is right?