Skip to content

[POC] feat(deployment): add domain config getter#825

Draft
graham-chainlink wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
ggoh/config-getter
Draft

[POC] feat(deployment): add domain config getter#825
graham-chainlink wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
ggoh/config-getter

Conversation

@graham-chainlink
Copy link
Collaborator

Add an Environment-level DomainConfigGetter interface with an os.Getenv-backed implementation, and cover default wiring plus getter behavior with focused deployment tests.

@changeset-bot
Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Mar 4, 2026

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: f1d4e79

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

Add an Environment-level DomainConfigGetter interface with an os.Getenv-backed implementation, and cover default wiring plus getter behavior with focused deployment tests.
@cl-sonarqube-production
Copy link

@graham-chainlink graham-chainlink changed the title feat(deployment): add domain config getter [POC] feat(deployment): add domain config getter Mar 4, 2026
OCRSecrets: e.OCRSecrets,
OperationsBundle: e.OperationsBundle,
BlockChains: e.BlockChains,
DomainConfigGetter: e.DomainConfigGetter,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm concerned that this is now bleeding CLD internals (domains) into an environment which doesn't need to know about this.

Think about a case like devenv where they may not actually have domains.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this may be more of a naming problem though.

If we remove Domain then I understand where this would work

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah i think domain may be the wrong name for it as the name couples the domain concept into cld

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

when its purpose is just to be a generic getter for configs

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