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

Type definitions for DCS #943

Open
sanketshevkar opened this issue Nov 18, 2024 · 8 comments · May be fixed by #952
Open

Type definitions for DCS #943

sanketshevkar opened this issue Nov 18, 2024 · 8 comments · May be fixed by #952

Comments

@sanketshevkar
Copy link
Member

sanketshevkar commented Nov 18, 2024

Bug Report 🐛

Type definitions for a DCS model are missing. Add generated typescript types of DCS Concerto Model to concerto-types module.

Expected Behavior

Type of DCS object should be centrally defined in concerto-types.

Possible Solution

We'll require a code generation script similar to this that will convert the DCS concerto model to its corresponding typescript definitions.

@Ayush1404
Copy link

Hi @sanketshevkar,

I hope you're doing well! I'm interested in contributing, but I'm having a bit of trouble understanding the issue. Could you kindly provide a bit more detail or clarify it for me?

Thanks so much in advance!

@sanketshevkar
Copy link
Member Author

Hi @Ayush1404
I've updated the issue description with some reference link.

@Ayush1404
Copy link

@sanketshevkar thank you , i will look into it

@sanketshevkar
Copy link
Member Author

@Ayush1404 just a heads up, I might pick this up next week on Wednesday, if not already started. Please let me know if you'd already started work on this.

@Ayush1404
Copy link

hey @sanketshevkar , sorry for the late reply , was a little busy due to college exams . We can do two things we can make changes in existing code-gen script to include DCS_MODEL from the decoratormanager.js file like this
Screenshot 2024-12-01 at 5 18 05 PM
or we can generate a new script , something like this
Screenshot 2024-12-01 at 5 21 15 PM
what do you think , which one do you think should we go for ?

@sanketshevkar
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks @Ayush1404. I'm sorry I don't want to bother you during your exams, hope you are done with them.

The first approach seems fit to to me.

@Ayush1404
Copy link

@sanketshevkar No problem , the exams are over now . Do i have to make any changes in it , before making a PR ?

@sanketshevkar
Copy link
Member Author

Idts, maybe just raise the PR following our contributors guideline and do not forget the DCO-Signoff :)

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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants