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

feat(elasticloadbalancingv2): add load balancer lookups #11089

Merged
merged 59 commits into from
Nov 9, 2020

Conversation

misterjoshua
Copy link
Contributor

@misterjoshua misterjoshua commented Oct 24, 2020

Adds fromLookup() methods to both Application and Network load balancers as well as their listeners.

Closes #11088


By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license

@gitpod-io
Copy link

gitpod-io bot commented Oct 24, 2020

@misterjoshua misterjoshua marked this pull request as draft October 24, 2020 23:58
@misterjoshua misterjoshua changed the title feat: add load balancer lookups feat(elasticloadbalancingv2): add load balancer lookups Oct 24, 2020
@misterjoshua misterjoshua marked this pull request as ready for review October 25, 2020 05:30
@njlynch njlynch requested review from njlynch and a team October 26, 2020 11:59
@njlynch njlynch self-assigned this Oct 26, 2020
@misterjoshua
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've looked over my code since I put this PR up. Given that this change entails a new manifest schema version, and that I have implemented looking up security groups by id: Is now a good time to add tag search for security groups?

Copy link
Contributor

@njlynch njlynch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the contribution! I would have preferred slightly smaller chunks over something this size -- e.g., just the load balancers by ARNs/tags would have been significant in itself. That being said, we'll take this as-is. I did a first pass of comments, will go deeper on the next round.

@misterjoshua
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for the review. I'll get to these changes as soon as possible. :)

@misterjoshua
Copy link
Contributor Author

@skinny85 I believe I've addressed your review items in the latest commits. I also updated from the main branch. Everything seems to be in working order. I'll continue to keep an eye out for more changes. :)

@iliapolo
Copy link
Contributor

iliapolo commented Nov 2, 2020

@skinny85 @misterjoshua I'm taking a look at the cx-api changes, added do-not-merge in the meantime just in case.

@iliapolo iliapolo added the pr/do-not-merge This PR should not be merged at this time. label Nov 2, 2020
@skinny85
Copy link
Contributor

skinny85 commented Nov 2, 2020

Thanks @iliapolo !

@rix0rrr if you could take a quick look at just the provider changes, that would be great.

@misterjoshua
Copy link
Contributor Author

misterjoshua commented Nov 3, 2020

While you guys are reviewing, would you prefer that I resolve the merge conflicts now or handle them later?

@njlynch
Copy link
Contributor

njlynch commented Nov 3, 2020

While you guys are reviewing, would you prefer that I resolve the merge conflicts now or handle them later?

Feel free to resolve them now.

@iliapolo
Copy link
Contributor

iliapolo commented Nov 3, 2020

@njlynch @skinny85 I'm good with the cx-api changes, so removing the do-not-merge I added.

@iliapolo iliapolo removed the pr/do-not-merge This PR should not be merged at this time. label Nov 3, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@njlynch njlynch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Really close, just one legitimate comment and a few stylistics nitpicks.

allowed-breaking-changes.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
loadBalancerArn: options.userOptions.loadBalancerArn,
loadBalancerTags: cxschemaTags,
loadBalancerType: options.loadBalancerType,
} as cxschema.LoadBalancerListenerContextQuery,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this cast really necessary?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@misterjoshua misterjoshua Nov 5, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The props are a { [key: string]: any }, so the cast isn't strictly necessary. But, I think the type hint is valuable if only for the reader's understanding, as otherwise, the correct type for the context query isn't obvious on inspection. I'll defer to your judgement on this matter if you still feel it should be changed. :)

packages/aws-cdk/lib/context-providers/load-balancers.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@njlynch njlynch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Great! Thanks for the contribution!

@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Nov 9, 2020

Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from master and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork).

@aws-cdk-automation
Copy link
Collaborator

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

  • CodeBuild project: AutoBuildProject6AEA49D1-qxepHUsryhcu
  • Commit ID: 488b6d8
  • Result: SUCCEEDED
  • Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Nov 9, 2020

Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from master and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork).

@mergify mergify bot merged commit 0153028 into aws:master Nov 9, 2020
@njlynch njlynch mentioned this pull request Aug 24, 2021
2 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[elasticloadbalancingv2] load balancers by lookup
5 participants