Skip to content

feat(client): list building block runners - #66

Merged
malhussan merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
feat/building-block-runner-data-source
Nov 4, 2026
Merged

malhussan merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
feat/building-block-runner-data-source

Conversation

@malhussan

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

🤖 Written by AI agent

The runner client can only read a runner by UUID. Finding a runner by display name or workspace needs the list endpoint, which the Terraform provider's meshstack_building_block_runner data source uses in meshcloud/terraform-provider-meshstack#370.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

@meshcloud-gh-actions

meshcloud-gh-actions Bot commented Nov 2, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Coverage of the acceptance run against the meshStack backend, on 0dd5865c4f3f3e371ae4ed45b90d9205baef1b22.

Scope Coverage
Unit tests 77.8%
Acceptance tests 55.3%
Combined 80.5%
Uncovered functions
client/api_key.go:52: meshApiKeyClient.Create 0.0%
client/api_key.go:56: meshApiKeyClient.Read 0.0%
client/api_key.go:60: meshApiKeyClient.Update 0.0%
client/api_key.go:64: meshApiKeyClient.Delete 0.0%
client/api_key_permissions.go:20: ApiKeyPermissions.AllCodes 0.0%
client/api_key_permissions.go:33: ApiKeyPermissions.WorkspaceCodes 0.0%
client/api_key_permissions.go:262: AllApiKeyPermissions 0.0%
client/api_key_permissions.go:266: WorkspacePermissionCodes 0.0%
client/building_block_definition.go:71: MeshBuildingBlockDefinitionApprovalPolicies.NothingRequiresApproval 0.0%
client/building_block_definition.go:82: DisabledSchedule 0.0%
client/building_block_definition.go:89: MeshBuildingBlockDefinitionSchedule.IsDisabled 0.0%
client/building_block_definition.go:93: MeshBuildingBlockDefinitionSpec.HasNeutralPolicies 0.0%
client/building_block_definition.go:97: MeshBuildingBlockDefinitionSpec.WithNeutralPolicies 0.0%
client/building_block_definition.go:166: meshBuildingBlockDefinitionClient.List 0.0%
client/building_block_definition.go:173: meshBuildingBlockDefinitionClient.Read 0.0%
client/building_block_definition.go:177: meshBuildingBlockDefinitionClient.Create 0.0%
client/building_block_definition.go:181: meshBuildingBlockDefinitionClient.Update 0.0%
client/building_block_definition.go:185: meshBuildingBlockDefinitionClient.Delete 0.0%
client/building_block_definition_version.go:100: MeshBuildingBlockType.TagInputTargets 0.0%
client/building_block_definition_version.go:245: meshBuildingBlockDefinitionVersionClient.Create 0.0%
client/building_block_definition_version.go:254: meshBuildingBlockDefinitionVersionClient.Update 0.0%
client/building_block_definition_version_implementation.go:80: MeshBuildingBlockDefinitionImplementation.InferType 0.0%
client/building_block_definition_version_implementation.go:94: MeshBuildingBlockDefinitionImplementation.MarshalJSON 0.0%
client/building_block_definition_version_implementation.go:107: *MeshBuildingBlockDefinitionImplementation.UnmarshalJSON 0.0%
client/building_block_runner.go:93: meshBuildingBlockRunnerClient.Create 0.0%
... and 132 more

covdata func names a method without its receiver, so an entry can belong to an implementation nothing selects rather than to a function the tests never reached. Open the file and line before reading one as a coverage gap.

@malhussan
malhussan marked this pull request as ready for review November 2, 2026 14:33
@malhussan
malhussan requested a review from grubmeshi November 2, 2026 14:33

@grubmeshi grubmeshi left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, i think we should agree at some point that such obvious PRs in cli can just be merged :D

@sonarqubecloud

sonarqubecloud Bot commented Nov 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@malhussan
malhussan merged commit c2b7347 into main Nov 4, 2026
13 checks passed
@malhussan
malhussan deleted the feat/building-block-runner-data-source branch November 4, 2026 08:26
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