Skip to content
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

[TASK] Split up storage adapter file #612

Open
shurwit opened this issue Oct 12, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

[TASK] Split up storage adapter file #612

shurwit opened this issue Oct 12, 2022 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@shurwit
Copy link
Collaborator

shurwit commented Oct 12, 2022

Description

Our storage adapter file is currently very long which can make it difficult to navigate.

Acceptance Criteria

We could split the storage adapter into mutliple files for related system components. One example of how we could split it is by using the same strategy that we applied to the models to group related types/components (eg. user, application...).

@shurwit shurwit added the enhancement New feature or request label Oct 12, 2022
@shurwit
Copy link
Collaborator Author

shurwit commented Oct 12, 2022

@petyos, I wanted to get your thoughts on this before making any changes. Do you think this is worth doing? If so, do you have any suggestions on how the functions should be grouped into different files? Thanks!

@petyos
Copy link
Collaborator

petyos commented Oct 13, 2022

Hi @shurwit , what about spliting them by entities:

  • file for User operations
  • file for Application operations
  • file for Organization operations
    etc?

@shurwit
Copy link
Collaborator Author

shurwit commented Oct 13, 2022

Hi @shurwit , what about spliting them by entities:

  • file for User operations
  • file for Application operations
  • file for Organization operations
    etc?

Hi @petyos, that's what I was thinking too, thanks! We'll handle this once we get to a good point merging open PRs.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants