Skip to content

GIE-497: Ols tool UI#36

Draft
iNecas wants to merge 3 commits intorhobs:mainfrom
iNecas:ols-tool-ui-rebase
Draft

GIE-497: Ols tool UI#36
iNecas wants to merge 3 commits intorhobs:mainfrom
iNecas:ols-tool-ui-rebase

Conversation

@iNecas
Copy link
Contributor

@iNecas iNecas commented Mar 2, 2026

Annotate the tool call to be picked by up OLS with openshift/lightspeed-console#1576

@iNecas iNecas requested a review from a team March 2, 2026 15:40
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from rexagod and slashpai March 2, 2026 15:40
@iNecas iNecas marked this pull request as draft March 2, 2026 15:41
@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 2, 2026

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: iNecas

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

The pull request process is described here

Details 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

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

openshift-ci-robot commented Mar 6, 2026

@iNecas: This pull request references GIE-497 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.22.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

Annotate the tool call to be picked by up OLS with openshift/lightspeed-console#1576

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@iNecas iNecas force-pushed the ols-tool-ui-rebase branch from 8bd371c to d9abb7e Compare March 6, 2026 17:21
@iNecas iNecas force-pushed the ols-tool-ui-rebase branch from d9abb7e to 9735337 Compare March 17, 2026 08:43
@rexagod
Copy link
Member

rexagod commented Mar 18, 2026

@iNecas Should I base #16 over this? I have a draft locally that incorporates the schema here and builds over them.

@iNecas
Copy link
Contributor Author

iNecas commented Mar 18, 2026

there should not be too much change here, there is one idea of @falox of splitting the execute query range and show_timeseries, and but that's mainly about what tools get annotated.

@rexagod
Copy link
Member

rexagod commented Mar 18, 2026

@iNecas I see. I'll finish up on the changes based on this in #16 and open it for reviews (and pull in any future changes made here).

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.

3 participants