revert: abstract Project class and `_providers_base()`
Metadata
Current evaluation
Merged partial revert of aeae554, dropping Project class abstraction and _providers_base(). Introduces a default _providers_base() to eliminate mandatory subclassing while retaining base validation. Approved by two reviewers and passed CI.
Suggested action: —
No scores available.
Issue body
- [x] Have you followed the guidelines for contributing?
- [x] Have you signed the [CLA](http://www.ubuntu.com/legal/contributors/)?
- [x] Have you successfully run `tox`?
-----
This is a partial revert of 'aeae554 feat!: validate devel bases (#302)'.
The base validation from #302 has not been reverted, but there is now a default implementation for `Project._providers_base()` such that applications do not need to subclass the Project model.
The default naming convention for bases is `name@channel`. Examples:
- `ubuntu@24.04`
- `ubuntu@devel`
- `almalinux@9`
Charmcraft is the only public application that can use this default `_providers_base()`.
A default BuildPlanner will come in a subsequent PR.
(CRAFT-2824)
Evaluation history
| Date | Model | Scores | Action | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| qwen/qwen3.6-35b-a3b | — | — | Merged partial revert of aeae554, dropping Project class abstraction and _providers_base(). Introduces a default _providers_base() to eliminate mandatory subclassing while retaining base validation. Approved by two reviewers and passed CI. | |
| qwen3.6-35b-a3b-mtp-q6 | — | — | Merged a partial revert adding a default Project._providers_base() implementation to remove subclassing requirements while preserving base validation. Adopts a name@channel naming convention. |
Update history
No update history recorded yet.
Related issues
No related issues found above the similarity threshold.