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

Investigate into gapic references not being resolved properly #151

Open
dandhlee opened this issue Nov 16, 2021 · 1 comment
Open

Investigate into gapic references not being resolved properly #151

dandhlee opened this issue Nov 16, 2021 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
priority: p2 Moderately-important priority. Fix may not be included in next release. 🚨 This issue needs some love. type: bug Error or flaw in code with unintended results or allowing sub-optimal usage patterns.

Comments

@dandhlee
Copy link
Collaborator

dandhlee commented Nov 16, 2021

Googlers see b/206688371.

Not sure why these are not resolved:

client_info: google.api_core.gapic_v1.client_info.ClientInfo = <google.api_core.gapic_v1.client_info.ClientInfo object>

Source code example:

client_info: gapic_v1.client_info.ClientInfo = DEFAULT_CLIENT_INFO

perhaps it's because the reference is a constant from another module. Will investigate.

@dandhlee dandhlee added type: bug Error or flaw in code with unintended results or allowing sub-optimal usage patterns. priority: p2 Moderately-important priority. Fix may not be included in next release. labels Nov 16, 2021
@dandhlee dandhlee self-assigned this Nov 16, 2021
@dandhlee
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Unfortunately this problem isn't plugin specific, not necessarily Sphinx specific but the way that the code gets pulled through object.__repr__() which does not correctly evaluate the object representation in cases like above.

Current googleapis.dev docs are also showing this behavior, will have to investigate further to see what I can do to bring the correct representation back.

@yoshi-automation yoshi-automation added 🚨 This issue needs some love. and removed 🚨 This issue needs some love. labels Feb 14, 2022
@yoshi-automation yoshi-automation added the 🚨 This issue needs some love. label May 15, 2022
@dandhlee dandhlee mentioned this issue Oct 31, 2022
2 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
priority: p2 Moderately-important priority. Fix may not be included in next release. 🚨 This issue needs some love. type: bug Error or flaw in code with unintended results or allowing sub-optimal usage patterns.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants