fix(): decision definition version use

[konekomind]

No description provided.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @konekomind, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request resolves a potential bug in the DMN engine's version management for decision definitions. The previous implementation incorrectly assumed that the last element in the decisionDefinitions slice always represented the latest version. This change introduces a more robust mechanism to determine the highest existing version, ensuring that new decision definitions are assigned correct, incremented version numbers, thereby preventing potential versioning conflicts or errors.

Highlights

• Corrected Decision Definition Versioning: The logic for assigning a new version to a decisionDefinition has been updated to correctly identify the highest existing version among all definitions.
• Robust Version Increment: Instead of assuming the last element in a slice is the latest, the code now explicitly iterates through all decisionDefinitions to find the maximum version before incrementing, ensuring accuracy regardless of slice order.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Changelog

• pkg/dmn/dmn_engine.go
  • Updated the saveDmnResourceDefinition function to iterate through the decisionDefinitions slice to find the maximum Version value.
  • Replaced the latestIndex := len(decisionDefinitions) - 1 approach with a loop-based search for the highest version.

Activity

• No human activity has been recorded on this pull request yet.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request aims to fix an issue with versioning of decision definitions. The previous implementation incorrectly used the oldest version to calculate the new version number. The new implementation correctly finds the latest version, but it introduces a potential panic if no previous versions exist and is also inefficient. I've suggested a fix that resolves the panic and simplifies the code by leveraging the fact that the database query already returns sorted results.