Skip to content

Merge develop into infrahub-develop#1071

Closed
infrahub-github-bot-app[bot] wants to merge 3 commits into
infrahub-developfrom
develop
Closed

Merge develop into infrahub-develop#1071
infrahub-github-bot-app[bot] wants to merge 3 commits into
infrahub-developfrom
develop

Conversation

@infrahub-github-bot-app

@infrahub-github-bot-app infrahub-github-bot-app Bot commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Merging develop into infrahub-develop after merging pull request #1070.


Summary by cubic

Merges develop into infrahub-develop and updates protocol typing: cardinality-one relationships now use a RelationshipAttribute[...] descriptor that reads as a typed RelatedNode[...] but accepts id/HFID/node/None assignments. Regenerate protocols with infrahubctl protocols to adopt the change; also bumps infrahub-testcontainers to 1.9.7.

Written for commit 78d99cd. Summary will update on new commits.

Review in cubic

dependabot Bot and others added 2 commits June 8, 2026 12:11
)

Bumps [infrahub-testcontainers](https://github.com/opsmill/infrahub) from 1.9.6 to 1.9.7.
- [Release notes](https://github.com/opsmill/infrahub/releases)
- [Changelog](https://github.com/opsmill/infrahub/blob/stable/CHANGELOG.md)
- [Commits](opsmill/infrahub@infrahub-v1.9.6...infrahub-v1.9.7)

---
updated-dependencies:
- dependency-name: infrahub-testcontainers
  dependency-version: 1.9.7
  dependency-type: direct:development
  update-type: version-update:semver-patch
...

Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Merge stable into develop
@cloudflare-workers-and-pages

cloudflare-workers-and-pages Bot commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Deploying infrahub-sdk-python with  Cloudflare Pages  Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit: 78d99cd
Status: ✅  Deploy successful!
Preview URL: https://bbb0ac7d.infrahub-sdk-python.pages.dev
Branch Preview URL: https://develop.infrahub-sdk-python.pages.dev

View logs

@infrahub-github-bot-app infrahub-github-bot-app Bot requested a review from a team as a code owner June 9, 2026 07:06
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 76.47059% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
infrahub_sdk/node/related_node.py 73.33% 0 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
@@                 Coverage Diff                  @@
##           infrahub-develop    #1071      +/-   ##
====================================================
- Coverage             82.26%   81.84%   -0.43%     
====================================================
  Files                   135      135              
  Lines                 11956    11684     -272     
  Branches               1785     1766      -19     
====================================================
- Hits                   9836     9563     -273     
+ Misses                 1573     1571       -2     
- Partials                547      550       +3     
Flag Coverage Δ
integration-tests 41.58% <0.00%> (-0.93%) ⬇️
python-3.10 55.17% <5.88%> (-0.82%) ⬇️
python-3.11 55.19% <5.88%> (-0.82%) ⬇️
python-3.12 55.17% <5.88%> (-0.83%) ⬇️
python-3.13 55.19% <5.88%> (-0.80%) ⬇️
python-3.14 55.17% <5.88%> (-0.82%) ⬇️
python-filler-3.12 22.42% <70.58%> (+0.08%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
infrahub_sdk/node/__init__.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
infrahub_sdk/protocols_generator/generator.py 95.12% <100.00%> (ø)
infrahub_sdk/node/related_node.py 91.00% <73.33%> (-1.57%) ⬇️

... and 3 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

#1067)

* IHS-183: Fix typing errors for protocols

* fix ty

* fix failing tests

* address comments

* use CoreNodeBase in get_schema_name

* remove breakpoint

* add test for store get_schema_name

* update test

* Make RelatedNode/RelationshipManager generic over peer type (#1063)

Parameterise RelatedNode, RelatedNodeSync, RelationshipManager and
RelationshipManagerSync over the peer type (defaulting to InfrahubNode/
InfrahubNodeSync for backward compatibility) and have infrahubctl protocols
emit the peer type for each relationship. Relationship traversal via .peer/
.peers/indexing now preserves the peer type instead of collapsing to the
dynamic InfrahubNode.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* Type cardinality-one relationships as an assignable descriptor (#1064)

Generated cardinality-one relationships now use a RelationshipAttribute
descriptor that reads back as RelatedNode[Peer] but accepts assignment of an id
string, an HFID, a peer node, or None — matching the runtime __setattr__ that
wraps the value in a RelatedNode. Previously relationships were typed read-only
as RelatedNode, so node.rel = "<id>" / node.rel = peer failed type checking.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* chore: regenerate SDK docs for generic RelatedNode peer types

The develop merge combined upstream peer/get docstrings with our generic
PeerT/PeerTSync return types, leaving the committed related_node.mdx stale.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* docs: note protocols must be regenerated in changelog fragment

Highlight in the 1064 newsfragment that the new relationship-assignment
typing lives in generated protocols, so existing projects must rerun
`infrahubctl protocols` to pick it up — it won't work out of the box.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: Sola Infrahub User <sola@opsmill.com>
Co-authored-by: Aaron McCarty <aaron@opsmill.com>
Co-authored-by: Sola Babatunde <solababatunde12@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Mikhail Yohman <mikhail@opsmill.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@ogenstad ogenstad closed this Jun 10, 2026
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