Skip to content

[ECOINT-40] Add Gravitee integration #2695

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

Merged
merged 20 commits into from
Jul 22, 2025
Merged

Conversation

dd-pub-platform[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

Integration Gravitee has been created in publishing platform

@dd-pub-platform dd-pub-platform bot requested review from a team as code owners May 17, 2025 12:00
@hestonhoffman hestonhoffman added the editorial review Waiting on a more in-depth review from a docs team editor label May 19, 2025
@dd-dominic dd-dominic changed the title Add Gravitee integration [ECOINT-40] Add Gravitee integration May 21, 2025
@urseberry
Copy link
Contributor

I'm the assigned reviewer from Documentation.

urseberry
urseberry previously approved these changes Jun 13, 2025
@baturalp-dd
Copy link

baturalp-dd commented Jun 17, 2025

Can you fix the linter issues for logs and ask for a review in the ticket once it’s ready? LOI-471

@dd-dominic dd-dominic requested review from a team and davidfeng-datadog and removed request for a team June 17, 2025 18:50
@davidfeng-datadog davidfeng-datadog force-pushed the pub_platform__gravitee branch 2 times, most recently from 7b001b1 to b33cbe9 Compare June 18, 2025 17:00
sourceType: attribute
target: gravitee.apiName
targetType: attribute
preserveSource: true

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there a reason we're choosing to preserve the source here? Unless it's strictly needed for backward compatibility, we’d usually prefer to set preserveSource: false to avoid storing the same information twice.

@temporal-github-worker-1 temporal-github-worker-1 bot dismissed urseberry’s stale review July 18, 2025 15:09

Review from urseberry is dismissed. Related teams and files:

  • documentation
    • gravitee/metadata.csv
@baturalp-dd baturalp-dd added the assets/deploy-logs-staging ONLY USED BY Logs Backend - Validates that a PR is OK to go to staging label Jul 18, 2025
baturalp-dd
baturalp-dd previously approved these changes Jul 18, 2025
Copy link

@baturalp-dd baturalp-dd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Approved for logs but there is a remaining unrelated validation check that needs to be addressed: https://github.com/DataDog/integrations-extras/actions/runs/16374260672/job/46270126793?pr=2695

@temporal-github-worker-1 temporal-github-worker-1 bot dismissed baturalp-dd’s stale review July 19, 2025 07:54

Review from baturalp-dd is dismissed. Related teams and files:

  • logs-backend
    • gravitee/assets/logs/gravitee.yaml
    • gravitee/assets/logs/gravitee_tests.yaml
  • logs-integrations-reviewers
    • gravitee/assets/logs/gravitee.yaml
    • gravitee/assets/logs/gravitee_tests.yaml
@davidfeng-datadog davidfeng-datadog requested a review from a team as a code owner July 22, 2025 14:37
@davidfeng-datadog davidfeng-datadog added this pull request to the merge queue Jul 22, 2025
Merged via the queue into master with commit 42c2d67 Jul 22, 2025
30 checks passed
@davidfeng-datadog davidfeng-datadog deleted the pub_platform__gravitee branch July 22, 2025 18:37
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
agent/approved assets/deploy-logs-staging ONLY USED BY Logs Backend - Validates that a PR is OK to go to staging docs/approved ecosystems/review-requested editorial review Waiting on a more in-depth review from a docs team editor kind/technology-partner product/review-requested
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants