fix(IAM Policy Management): update subject attribute value #297
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…PI def Signed-off-by: Shaun Colley <shaun.colley@ibm.com>
ibm-devx-sdk
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 26, 2024
## [0.56.3](v0.56.2...v0.56.3) (2024-01-26) ### Bug Fixes * **IAM Policy Management:** update subject attribute value based on API def ([#297](#297)) ([21accf1](21accf1))
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 0.56.3 🎉 The release is available on GitHub release Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Issue: https://github.ibm.com/IAM/AM-issues/issues/2140
PR summary
Minor fix of subject attribute value type to match API and other attributes value type.
PR Checklist
Please make sure that your PR fulfills the following requirements:
Current vs new behavior
Subject attribute value should not be limited to a string, but should allow for other types based on API. This change allows that.
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
Other information
Out of testing:
Integration tests:
examples: