feat(context-providers) Enable arguments to be passed as property object #823

moofish32 · 2018-10-02T00:42:24Z

This is a first draft at updates originally from #425

I am attempting to apply some types to context providers where there were just arrays.
The arrays were good because of ordering, but I've attempted to preserve that with a sort.

I would like to implement a VPC Provider because I find imports for VPCs painful. In addition
to solving a customer problems VPC Provider will stress the ability to return a complex type.

Is this design in the right direction?

TODO - fix commit message this is a BREAKING Change

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

moofish32 · 2018-10-02T00:42:59Z

I'll go back and remove the package lock diffs, my apologies.

moofish32 · 2018-10-02T06:39:53Z

I need a hint on where this integ test failure is located.

@aws-cdk/aws-autoscaling: A reserved context key ('context.aws:') key was found in /home/travis/build/awslabs/aws-cdk/packages/@aws-cdk/aws-autoscaling/test/cdk.json, it might cause surprising behavior and should be removed.
@aws-cdk/aws-autoscaling: A reserved context key ('context.aws:') key was found in /home/travis/build/awslabs/aws-cdk/packages/@aws-cdk/aws-autoscaling/test/cdk.json, it might cause surprising behavior and should be removed.
@aws-cdk/aws-autoscaling: Need to perform AWS calls for account 12345678, but no credentials found. Tried: default credentials.
@aws-cdk/aws-autoscaling: Error: Command exited with status 1
@aws-cdk/aws-autoscaling:     at exec (/home/travis/build/awslabs/aws-cdk/tools/cdk-integ-tools/lib/integ-helpers.js:102:15)
@aws-cdk/aws-autoscaling:     at IntegrationTest.invoke (/home/travis/build/awslabs/aws-cdk/tools/cdk-integ-tools/lib/integ-helpers.js:50:20)
@aws-cdk/aws-autoscaling:     at <anonymous>
@aws-cdk/aws-autoscaling: Error: cdk-integ-assert exited with error code 1

I can't seem to trace this back through the integ helper.

moofish32 · 2018-10-05T13:33:04Z

packages/aws-cdk/lib/api/util/sdk.ts


 let region = process.env.AWS_REGION || process.env.AMAZON_REGION ||
-  process.env.AWS_DEFAULT_REGION || process.env.AMAZON_DEFAULT_REGION;
+ process.env.AWS_DEFAULT_REGION || process.env.AMAZON_DEFAULT_REGION;


not sure why this is autoformatting this way, but I'll fix this.

moofish32 · 2018-10-05T13:37:01Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/cxapi.ts

@@ -24,10 +24,17 @@ export type CXRequest = ListStacksRequest | SynthesizeRequest;
 * Represents a missing piece of context.
 * (should have been an interface, but jsii still doesn't have support for structs).
 */
-export interface MissingContext {
+export interface ContextProviderProps {


after reading this again (a few days later). I think I'm ready to switch this back to MissingContext.

export interface MissingContext { provider: string; props: { account: string; region: string; [key: string]: string; }; }

Yes please.

* Add Hosted Zone Provider * Enabling complex filter types for context provider keys

moofish32 · 2018-10-08T00:18:15Z

@rix0rrr @eladb looking for a little feedback on the direction here.

My end goal is to enable a significantly improved capability for VPC Import. Right now you have to know the vpcIds and all the subnetIds in order to use a VpcPlacementStrategy.

Instead of having do something like

export class MyStack extends cdk.Stack {
    constructor(parent: cdk.App, name: string, props?: cdk.StackProps) {
        super(parent, name, props);
        const vpc: ec2.VpcNetworkRef = ec2.VpcNetwork.import(this, 'MyVPC', {
            vpcId: new ec2.VPCId(props.vpcId),
           availabilityZones: props.availabilityZones,
           publicSubnetIds: props.subnetIds,
           isolatedSubnetIds: [],
        });
       // create VpcPlacementStrategy
       // create my asg or other resources (e.g. lambda, eks, ecs etc)
       // I would rather 
      const vpc: ec2.VpcNetworkRef = ec2.VpcProvider(this, { vpcId: 'vpc-xxxxxxxx' });
      // or
      const vpc2: ec2.VpcNetworkRef = ec2.VpcProvider(this, { cidrBlock: '192.168.0.0/16'});
      // essentially enable the filters you see here: 
      // https://docs.aws.amazon.com/cli/latest/reference/ec2/describe-vpcs.html
   }
}

In addition to Vpc we would also enable the AMI look up feature that would not rely on the ssm parameter method we have now. Obviously the type checking and casting behavior would all be hidden from the user, but we have to use some any values to enable this code behind the scenes.

Most important question I have is: Is this a good feature to spend time implementing and am I headed in the right direction?

eladb · 2018-10-08T06:17:16Z

@rix0rrr can you please take a look at this?

rix0rrr · 2018-10-09T07:51:09Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/cxapi.ts

@@ -24,10 +24,17 @@ export type CXRequest = ListStacksRequest | SynthesizeRequest;
 * Represents a missing piece of context.
 * (should have been an interface, but jsii still doesn't have support for structs).
 */
-export interface MissingContext {
+export interface ContextProviderProps {


Yes please.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-09T07:51:51Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/cxapi.ts

 provider: string;
- scope: string[];
- args: string[];
+ account: string;


If we're going to use a dict anyway, then shouldn't account and region also just go into that dict?

rix0rrr · 2018-10-09T07:56:44Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cdk/lib/context.ts

 }

+ public get key(): string {
+ const account = this.account;


Personally I'd prefer it if you put all the different string fragments into an array and called .join(':') on them. Simplifies this method a bunch. So something like this:

const parts = [this.provider, this.account, this.region].concat(this.propsToArray()); return parts.join(':');

In fact, I wonder if we shouldn't just add region and account to the props object.

If we move account and region into props, do we care if those are just sorted like all other props or should I pull them to the front and filter them out? Personally, I am fine with them sorted.

Yes me too.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-09T07:58:05Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cdk/lib/context.ts

-
- if (account == null || region == null) {
- return undefined;
+ private objectToString(obj: any): string[] {


The function name lies. It doesn't return a string at all.

Also, since it doesn't access this. at all, no need for it to be a member/class function. You can move it to a free function.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-09T07:59:08Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cdk/lib/context.ts

+ switch (typeof obj[key]) {
+ case 'object': {
+ const childObjStrs = this.objectToString(obj[key]);
+ const qualifiedChildStr = childObjStrs.map( child => (`${key}${child}`)).join(':');


Feels like this needs a separator: ${key}.${child} or something.

Also, I'd be perfectly happy disallow this case.

Ok - so I started by blocking this. However, I have found it very useful to allow tags to be used in providers (from other frameworks that provide similar function). Both AMIs and VPCs are great examples where tags will be useful. So I would prefer to add the separator and keep the use case.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-09T08:01:54Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cdk/lib/context.ts


- constructor(private context: Construct) {
+ constructor(private context: Construct, provider: string, props: {[key: string]: any} = {}) {


If you declare the arguments as:

constructor(..., private readonly provider: string, private readonly props: {[key: string]: any} = {}) { }

You don't have to declare the member variables above and don't have to assign them either, that happens automatically.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-09T08:06:14Z

packages/aws-cdk/lib/contextplugins.ts

 import { Mode, SDK } from './api';
 import { debug } from './logging';
 import { Settings } from './settings';

 export interface ContextProviderPlugin {
- getValue(scope: string[], args: string[]): Promise<any>;
+ getValue(filter: cxapi.ContextProviderProps): Promise<any>;


how about provider: cxapi.MissingContext instead?

After moving account and region into the dictdionary, is there a reason to pass the entire ContextProviderProps object anymore?

We can just do:

getValue(args: {[key: string]: any})

right?

ahh - a little different than what I first thought, but let me try that.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-09T08:07:09Z

packages/aws-cdk/lib/contextplugins.ts

+ const props: cxapi.HostedZoneProviderProps = filter.props;
+ const domainName = props.domainName;
+ const privateZone: boolean = !!props.privateZone;
+ const vpcId =


yeah -- this looks like a coding on a plane bonus bug ✈️ 🐛

Should we expand the scope of this PR and find a away to integration test these?

I'm not opposed to it, but I have no clever ideas on how to do it that wouldn't take a long time to build and/or make tests complicated to run.

For example, if we're going to test the actual service call, we'd need AWS credentials and network access on every build--something we can (mostly) avoid now.

You might potentially consider mocking/stubbing the external APIs, OR having a test that you run manually, and a signature (like a hash of the file) to assert that you manually ran the test on the latest version of the source.

I haven't fully looked at this yet, but perhaps you can tell me I'm walking into a big thing.

My thought was to keep this as simple as possible. Enable cdk-integ to be able to run more than one stack. Create resources in the first stack and use providers to find those resources in the second stack. Then sanitize the cdk.json file with the appropriate region/account information such that AWS API credentials are not required after the developer runs the integration test locally.

This definitely isn't simple, but would that work and not be a nightmare to implement?

It's definitely a bit out of the mold of our current integ tests.

You can't comfortable write this test in aws-cdk package (I don't think), it has to go in one of the library packages. Which one?

How are we going to specify the order between multiple stacks in cdk-integ? We have explicitly punted on that because there's no way to automatically infer it, and no place to specify it.

We don't check in cdk.json usually, and in fact cdk-integ automatically deletes it. To be able to run an offline test we should keep that file; but preferably not all files in all cases, so only some instances of that file...

rix0rrr · 2018-10-09T08:09:22Z

packages/aws-cdk/lib/contextplugins.ts

+ return candidateZones[0];
+ }
+
+ private filterZones(r53: AWS.Route53, zones: AWS.Route53.HostedZone[], privateZone: boolean, vpcId: string | undefined): AWS.Route53.HostedZone[] {


rix0rrr · 2018-10-09T08:09:46Z

packages/aws-cdk/lib/contextplugins.ts

+ if (vpcId) {
+ const vpcZones: AWS.Route53.HostedZone[] = [];
+ for (const zone of candidates) {
+ r53.getHostedZone({Id: zone.Id}, (err, data) => {


This is not going to do what you want, because it's going to be asynchronous.

Just add an await.

* Add Hosted Zone Provider * Add ability to pass dictionary to MissingContext

moofish32 · 2018-10-10T08:01:06Z

It's definitely a bit out of the mold of our current integ tests.

You can't comfortable write this test in aws-cdk package (I don't think), it has to go in one of the library packages. Which one?
How are we going to specify the order between multiple stacks in cdk-integ? We have explicitly punted on that because there's no way to automatically infer it, and no place to specify it.
We don't check in cdk.json usually, and in fact cdk-integ automatically deletes it. To be able to run an offline test we should keep that file; but preferably not all files in all cases, so only some instances of that file...

I understand what you are saying. I did think the integ tests would need a new type provider.ssm.ts instead of integ.<L2>.ts in the test folder. However, looking at cdk-integ this is bigger than I can do in this PR. The other question is does the team think this is worth it?

Should we move the providers into the @aws-cdk packages in this?
AvailabilityZone -> @aws-cdk/aws-ec2
SSM -> @aws-cdk/aws-ssm
HostedZone -> @aws-cdk/aws-route53

I'll need to do some more manual testing as well.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-10T08:54:03Z

Should we move the providers into the @aws-cdk packages in this?
No, they're definitely part of the toolkit.

For now, we don't really have a better answer than manual testing. This is admittedly not great and we're aware of this and thinking about it, but this is the state of the world.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-10T08:55:25Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cdk/lib/context.ts

+ public get key(): string {
+ const propStrings: string[] = propsToArray({
+ ...this.props,
+ ...{account: this.account, region: this.region},


Literals don't need a splat. Could just be:

{ ...this.props, account: this.account, region: this.region }

rix0rrr · 2018-10-10T08:56:52Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cdk/lib/context.ts

- this.stack.reportMissingContext(key, { provider, scope, args });
+ this.stack.reportMissingContext(this.key, {
+ provider: this.provider,
+ props: { ...this.props, ...{region: this.region, account: this.account} },


To avoid this duplication, I'm thinking it might even be worth adding a private getter for the "full props", or embed {account, region} into the object at creation time.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-10T09:00:45Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/cxapi.ts

- scope: string[];
- args: string[];
+ props: {
+ account: string;


I believe account and region are still potentially undefined (for providers that don't require them--even though we don't have any right now), so add a ? to them.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-10T09:04:14Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/cxapi.ts

+ };
+}
+
+export interface HostedZoneProviderProps {


I feel this should be defined next to the HostedZoneProvider class.

I don't feel comfortable using one struct for both the API properties and defining the wire protocol, because they're distinct things. It's probably okay to have an implicit protocol on the wire (or define 2 structs for 2 distinct purposes).

rix0rrr · 2018-10-10T09:07:43Z

packages/aws-cdk/lib/contextplugins.ts

+ if (vpcId) {
+ const vpcZones: AWS.Route53.HostedZone[] = [];
+ for (const zone of candidates) {
+ await r53.getHostedZone({Id: zone.Id}, (err, data) => {


I should have been more specific here. I'm not sure whether this works or not, but it sure looks weird to me. I actually meant doing the following:

const data = await r53.getHostedZone({ Id: zone. Id }).promise(); // No need to check for err, just look at data afterwards

It's the same pattern as for the listHostedZonesByName call you're doing in the other function, and basically the way all SDK calls should look.

The .promise() at the end is a weird convention that the SDK has in there (they could have made it so it works without it, but they didn't). It makes it possible to await this API call.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-10T09:14:16Z

packages/aws-cdk/lib/contextplugins.ts

+ for (const zone of candidates) {
+ await r53.getHostedZone({Id: zone.Id}, (err, data) => {
+ if (err) {
+ throw new Error(err.message);


Not that it matters because you're going to be rewriting this call sequyence anyway, but throwing an Error in an async callback is almost never what you want to be doing.

In an async callback your call stack is gone: you're basically a couple of stack frames deep in an event loop, and throwing an error is basically only going to abort your callback and the rest of the failure is lost. To pull the thread all the way through, you'll generally call another callback with the error (boooh) or report the error via a promise (yay).

But the await syntax takes care of all of that for you.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-10T09:16:49Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cdk/lib/context.ts

+ constructor(
+ private readonly context: Construct,
+ private readonly provider: string,
+ private readonly props: {[key: string]: any} = {}) {
 this.stack = Stack.find(context);


I think we just go like this in the constructor:

this.props.account = this.stack.env.account; this.props.region = this.stack.env.region;

And then in all other places we just use this.props.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-10T09:19:16Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cdk/lib/context.ts

 // if scope is undefined, this is probably a test mode, so we just
 // return the default value
- if (!scope) {
- this.context.addError(formatMissingScopeError(provider, args));
+ if (!this.account || !this.region) {


Interestingly, this now means something else. Because previously there was a distinction between "not having a scope" and "not having an account/region", and now there isn't anymore.

This only comes into play if we have context providers that don't need both an account and a region, which we don't have right now anyway so I'm okay with this change and we can always fix it once we do. But it's something to consider.

moofish32 · 2018-10-15T21:47:46Z

@rix0rrr -- I used this to test the provider:

#!/usr/bin/env node
import r53 = require('@aws-cdk/aws-route53');
import ec2 = require('@aws-cdk/aws-ec2');
import cdk = require('@aws-cdk/cdk');

class TestLatestCdkStack extends cdk.Stack {
  constructor(parent: cdk.App, name: string, props?: cdk.StackProps) {
    super(parent, name, props);
    const vpc = new ec2.VpcNetwork(this, 'MyVpc', {
      subnetConfiguration: [
        {
          cidrMask: 24,
          name: 'Public',
          subnetType: ec2.SubnetType.Public,
        }
      ]
    });

    new r53.PrivateHostedZone(this, 'PrivateZone', {
      zoneName: 'vpc.internal',
      vpc,
    });

    new r53.PublicHostedZone(this, 'PublicZone', {
      zoneName: 'tdfa.xyz',
      comment: 'CDK created',
    });

  }
}

class TestLatestHosted extends cdk.Stack {
  constructor(parent: cdk.App, name: string, props?: cdk.StackProps) {
    super(parent, name, props);
    new r53.PublicHostedZone(this, 'PublicZone', {
      zoneName: 'tdfi.xyz',
      comment: 'CDK created',
    });
    const hostedZoneProps: r53.HostedZoneRefProps = new r53.HostedZoneProvider( this, { domainName: 'tdfa.xyz', }).findHostedZone();
    const zone = r53.HostedZoneRef.import(this, 'Imported', hostedZoneProps);
    new cdk.Output(this, 'Test', {
      value: zone.hostedZoneId,
    });
    const privateZoneProps: r53.HostedZoneRefProps = new r53.HostedZoneProvider( this, {
      domainName: 'vpc.internal',
      privateZone: true,
      vpcId: '<your vpc id>', // I should automate this
    }).findHostedZone();
    const privateZone = r53.HostedZoneRef.import(this, 'ImportedPrivate', privateZoneProps);
    new r53.TXTRecord(zone, 'txt', {
      recordName: 'mytxt',
      recordValue: 'special text message for validation',
    });
    new r53.TXTRecord(privateZone, 'privateTxt', {
      recordName: 'mytxt',
      recordValue: 'special text message for validation',
    });
  }

}
const app = new cdk.App();

new TestLatestHosted(app, 'TestHosted');
new TestLatestCdkStack(app, 'TestLatestCdkStack');

app.run();

I moved the provider (non AWS SDK side -- do we have a name for the split?) into the route53 module because I wanted to return the data structure for r53.HostedZoneRef.import( ... ). Sorry to make some changes this late in the process (specifically I've changed the function name to findHostedZone). I'm not sure if we should make this a generic name or a specific name per provider?

moofish32 · 2018-10-15T21:58:49Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cdk/lib/context.ts

- if (!stack) {
- throw new Error(`${providerDescription}: construct must be in a stack`);
- }
+ public getStringListValue(


I think I can dry this function up by passing a function here. I don't think I can use generics here. I suppose I could extract this to a non exported function and pass everything into it, but I think just passing a validateType(value: any): boolean{} will probably do?

actually that is also blocked by JSII ... I'm not sure we can really DRY this up much then?

It's fine as-is.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-17T07:57:20Z

packages/@aws-cdk/aws-route53/lib/hosted-zone-provider.ts

+ /**
+ * Return the hosted zone meeting the filter
+ */
+ public findHostedZone(): HostedZoneRefProps {


Now that you have this, might even make sense to add a convenience import function on this class as well:

public findAndImport(parent: cdk.Construct, id: string): HostedZoneRef { return HostedZoneRef.import(parent, id, this.findHostedZone()); }

Great idea 👍 I will add.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-17T07:59:08Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cdk/lib/context.ts

@@ -4,6 +4,11 @@ import { Construct } from './core/construct';
 const AVAILABILITY_ZONES_PROVIDER = 'availability-zones';
 const SSM_PARAMETER_PROVIDER = 'ssm';

+export interface ContextProviderProps {


Can't believe I didn't trip over this before. I don't think this translates into JSII. You're going to have to define it as

Suggested change

export interface ContextProviderProps {

type ContextProviderProps = {[key: string]: any};

That means we can't enforce the presence of account and region, but those will have to be runtime checks. And it's still feasible to have context providers without those parameters.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-17T08:01:27Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cdk/lib/context.ts

- if (!stack) {
- throw new Error(`${providerDescription}: construct must be in a stack`);
- }
+ public getStringListValue(


It's fine as-is.

rix0rrr · 2018-10-17T08:03:55Z

Looks good! Final touches and then we can get it in.

moofish32 · 2018-10-18T18:17:23Z

@rix0rrr -- I believe I have implemented the final changes, trying to fix that conflict with the last push. Anything else you see from me? I believe this is breaking, but open to trying to make this more backwards compatible if we need to.

moofish32

Found a couple of issues to resolve

packages/@aws-cdk/aws-route53/test/test.hosted-zone-provider.ts

moofish32 · 2018-10-18T18:59:35Z

packages/@aws-cdk/cdk/lib/context.ts

 }
 }

+export interface SSMParameterProviderProps {


I need docs here

packages/@aws-cdk/cdk/lib/context.ts

packages/aws-cdk/lib/contextplugins.ts

__IMPORTANT NOTE__: when upgrading to this version of the CDK framework, you must also upgrade your installation the CDK Toolkit to the matching version: ```shell $ npm i -g aws-cdk $ cdk --version 0.14.0 (build ...) ``` Bug Fixes ========= * remove CloudFormation property renames ([#973](#973)) ([3f86603](3f86603)), closes [#852](#852) * **aws-ec2:** fix retention of all egress traffic rule ([#998](#998)) ([b9d5b43](b9d5b43)), closes [#987](#987) * **aws-s3-deployment:** avoid deletion during update using physical ids ([#1006](#1006)) ([bca99c6](bca99c6)), closes [#981](#981) [#981](#981) * **cloudformation-diff:** ignore changes to DependsOn ([#1005](#1005)) ([3605f9c](3605f9c)), closes [#274](#274) * **cloudformation-diff:** track replacements ([#1003](#1003)) ([a83ac5f](a83ac5f)), closes [#1001](#1001) * **docs:** fix EC2 readme for "natgatway" configuration ([#994](#994)) ([0b1e7cc](0b1e7cc)) * **docs:** updates to contribution guide ([#997](#997)) ([b42e742](b42e742)) * **iam:** Merge multiple principals correctly ([#983](#983)) ([3fc5c8c](3fc5c8c)), closes [#924](#924) [#916](#916) [#958](#958) Features ========= * add construct library for Application AutoScaling ([#933](#933)) ([7861c6f](7861c6f)), closes [#856](#856) [#861](#861) [#640](#640) [#644](#644) * add HostedZone context provider ([#823](#823)) ([1626c37](1626c37)) * **assert:** haveResource lists failing properties ([#1016](#1016)) ([7f6f3fd](7f6f3fd)) * **aws-cdk:** add CDK app version negotiation ([#988](#988)) ([db4e718](db4e718)), closes [#891](#891) * **aws-codebuild:** Introduce a CodePipeline test Action. ([#873](#873)) ([770f9aa](770f9aa)) * **aws-sqs:** Add grantXxx() methods ([#1004](#1004)) ([8c90350](8c90350)) * **core:** Pre-concatenate Fn::Join ([#967](#967)) ([33c32a8](33c32a8)), closes [#916](#916) [#958](#958) BREAKING CHANGES ========= * DynamoDB AutoScaling: Instead of `addReadAutoScaling()`, call `autoScaleReadCapacity()`, and similar for write scaling. * CloudFormation resource usage: If you use L1s, you may need to change some `XxxName` properties back into `Name`. These will match the CloudFormation property names. * You must use the matching `aws-cdk` toolkit when upgrading to this version, or context providers will cease to work. All existing cached context values in `cdk.json` will be invalidated and refreshed.

__IMPORTANT NOTE__: when upgrading to this version of the CDK framework, you must also upgrade your installation the CDK Toolkit to the matching version: ```shell $ npm i -g aws-cdk $ cdk --version 0.14.0 (build ...) ``` Bug Fixes ========= * remove CloudFormation property renames ([aws#973](aws#973)) ([3f86603](aws@3f86603)), closes [aws#852](aws#852) * **aws-ec2:** fix retention of all egress traffic rule ([aws#998](aws#998)) ([b9d5b43](aws@b9d5b43)), closes [aws#987](aws#987) * **aws-s3-deployment:** avoid deletion during update using physical ids ([aws#1006](aws#1006)) ([bca99c6](aws@bca99c6)), closes [aws#981](aws#981) [aws#981](aws#981) * **cloudformation-diff:** ignore changes to DependsOn ([aws#1005](aws#1005)) ([3605f9c](aws@3605f9c)), closes [aws#274](aws#274) * **cloudformation-diff:** track replacements ([aws#1003](aws#1003)) ([a83ac5f](aws@a83ac5f)), closes [aws#1001](aws#1001) * **docs:** fix EC2 readme for "natgatway" configuration ([aws#994](aws#994)) ([0b1e7cc](aws@0b1e7cc)) * **docs:** updates to contribution guide ([aws#997](aws#997)) ([b42e742](aws@b42e742)) * **iam:** Merge multiple principals correctly ([aws#983](aws#983)) ([3fc5c8c](aws@3fc5c8c)), closes [aws#924](aws#924) [aws#916](aws#916) [aws#958](aws#958) Features ========= * add construct library for Application AutoScaling ([aws#933](aws#933)) ([7861c6f](aws@7861c6f)), closes [aws#856](aws#856) [aws#861](aws#861) [aws#640](aws#640) [aws#644](aws#644) * add HostedZone context provider ([aws#823](aws#823)) ([1626c37](aws@1626c37)) * **assert:** haveResource lists failing properties ([aws#1016](aws#1016)) ([7f6f3fd](aws@7f6f3fd)) * **aws-cdk:** add CDK app version negotiation ([aws#988](aws#988)) ([db4e718](aws@db4e718)), closes [aws#891](aws#891) * **aws-codebuild:** Introduce a CodePipeline test Action. ([aws#873](aws#873)) ([770f9aa](aws@770f9aa)) * **aws-sqs:** Add grantXxx() methods ([aws#1004](aws#1004)) ([8c90350](aws@8c90350)) * **core:** Pre-concatenate Fn::Join ([aws#967](aws#967)) ([33c32a8](aws@33c32a8)), closes [aws#916](aws#916) [aws#958](aws#958) BREAKING CHANGES ========= * DynamoDB AutoScaling: Instead of `addReadAutoScaling()`, call `autoScaleReadCapacity()`, and similar for write scaling. * CloudFormation resource usage: If you use L1s, you may need to change some `XxxName` properties back into `Name`. These will match the CloudFormation property names. * You must use the matching `aws-cdk` toolkit when upgrading to this version, or context providers will cease to work. All existing cached context values in `cdk.json` will be invalidated and refreshed.

moofish32 mentioned this pull request Oct 2, 2018

Hosted Zone Context Provider #425

Closed

moofish32 force-pushed the context-provider-fix branch from baf96fa to 1e07618 Compare October 5, 2018 13:12

moofish32 changed the title ~~Context Provider Improvements~~ feat(context-providers) Enable arguments to be passed as property object Oct 5, 2018

moofish32 commented Oct 5, 2018

View reviewed changes

moofish32 force-pushed the context-provider-fix branch from 1e07618 to a9110d1 Compare October 7, 2018 13:51

feat(context-providers) Refactor to enable context providers properties

f6c1ec2

* Add Hosted Zone Provider * Enabling complex filter types for context provider keys

moofish32 force-pushed the context-provider-fix branch from a9110d1 to f6c1ec2 Compare October 7, 2018 23:41

rix0rrr reviewed Oct 9, 2018

View reviewed changes

feat(context-providers) Refactor to enable context providers properties

2e77cac

* Add Hosted Zone Provider * Add ability to pass dictionary to MissingContext

rix0rrr reviewed Oct 10, 2018

View reviewed changes

moofish32 added 5 commits October 14, 2018 20:53

hosted zone refactor

b3b7226

Merge branch 'master' into context-provider-fix

b764b97

fixing commit merge

ca25785

initial working filters and errors

0e13281

moving test into route53 module

318afcc

moofish32 commented Oct 15, 2018

View reviewed changes

removing commented code

ffa83c3

rix0rrr reviewed Oct 17, 2018

View reviewed changes

moofish32 added 3 commits October 17, 2018 11:43

adding findAndImport to HostedZoneProvider

c0d863d

refactor context provider props from interface to type

42758db

resolving conflict

47816e0

resolving conflicts in package-lock

0cde788

moofish32 commented Oct 18, 2018

View reviewed changes

cleaning up code

9dd737a

rix0rrr approved these changes Oct 22, 2018

View reviewed changes

rix0rrr merged commit 1626c37 into aws:master Oct 22, 2018

rix0rrr mentioned this pull request Oct 26, 2018

v0.14.0 #1021

Merged


		constructor(private context: Construct) {
		constructor(private context: Construct, provider: string, props: {[key: string]: any} = {}) {

	export interface ContextProviderProps {
	type ContextProviderProps = {[key: string]: any};

feat(context-providers) Enable arguments to be passed as property object #823

feat(context-providers) Enable arguments to be passed as property object #823

Conversation

moofish32 commented Oct 2, 2018

moofish32 commented Oct 2, 2018

moofish32 commented Oct 2, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

moofish32 commented Oct 8, 2018

eladb commented Oct 8, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

moofish32 commented Oct 10, 2018 • edited Loading

rix0rrr commented Oct 10, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

moofish32 commented Oct 15, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rix0rrr commented Oct 17, 2018

moofish32 commented Oct 18, 2018

moofish32 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

moofish32 commented Oct 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

moofish32 commented Oct 15, 2018 •

edited

Loading