Skip to content

feat: Shared knowledge problem related permission constant #3811

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

Conversation

shaohuzhang1
Copy link
Contributor

feat: Shared knowledge problem related permission constant

Copy link

f2c-ci-robot bot commented Aug 5, 2025

Adding the "do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed" label because no release-note block was detected, please follow our release note process to remove it.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

Copy link

f2c-ci-robot bot commented Aug 5, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

SHARED_KNOWLEDGE_PROBLEM_RELATE = Permission(
group=Group.SYSTEM_KNOWLEDGE_PROBLEM, operate=Operate.RELATE, role_list=[RoleConstants.ADMIN],
parent_group=[SystemGroup.SHARED_KNOWLEDGE]
)
SHARED_KNOWLEDGE_HIT_TEST = Permission(
group=Group.SYSTEM_KNOWLEDGE_HIT_TEST, operate=Operate.READ, role_list=[RoleConstants.ADMIN],
parent_group=[SystemGroup.SHARED_KNOWLEDGE]
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The provided code snippet looks mostly clear and follows a consistent structure, but there are no obvious irregularities or errors. However, here are a few suggestions for improvement:

  1. Consistent Indentation: Ensure that all elements under each Permission constant have consistent indentation to maintain readability.

  2. Variable Naming: The variable names are already in snake_case, which is generally a good practice for constants. If you're using a more explicit naming convention (e.g., PascalCase), consider adopting it consistently throughout the module.

  3. Comments: Adding comments can help clarify the purpose of this section if additional context was omitted. For example, what exactly does each permission represent?

  4. Duplicated Parent Groups: There are repeated mentions of SystemGroup.SHARED_KNOWLEDGE in both SHARED_KNOWLEDGE_PROBLEM and SHARED_KNOWLEDGE_HIT_TEST. This might be redundant unless there's intentional duplication intended.

Overall, the current implementation meets most best practices for declaring permissions within an enumeration.

@zhanweizhang7 zhanweizhang7 merged commit d297890 into v2 Aug 5, 2025
3 of 4 checks passed
@zhanweizhang7 zhanweizhang7 deleted the pr@v2@feat_shared_knowledge_problem_related_permission_constant branch August 5, 2025 03:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants