-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 35
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: allow inclusion of image copy to pipeline #212
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
7674df6
to
f367149
Compare
@wchaws how this sounds? I think this require more tests and probably some documentation, but just initial thought wanted before polishing. |
f367149
to
4a720e2
Compare
Ah, currently this seems to be working only with CodePipeline, not with Pipelines. I'll check today that construct would be usable with both. And now realized that also Lambda need to be a bit different on handler side, as events and returns are different. |
4a720e2
to
1eebc0c
Compare
e604085
to
7410518
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I like this idea, but it shouldn't be added to the existing construct. Instead we will need a an ECRDeploymentAction
and ECRDeploymentStep
respectively that can be constructed explicitly. This should still allow re-use of the same functionality.
Additionally I am not sure if pipeline actions/steps should share the same singleton function with the custom resource. That seems undesirable to me. The CR is a means to end to achieve the IaC declaration of "I need a copy of this image in that place", the fact it creates a lambda function is an implementation detail.
However as a Pipeline Action/Step to me this really becomes what the IaC declaring: A function that can be used to copy images from A to B. I'm not even sure if these should be a singleton at all.
I'll try to check this. We have all this time used custom version of pipeline inclusion, and it has worked in a very nice way. |
d7c109e
to
f11c32a
Compare
Made some modifications. Also some refactoring with Lamdba to allow simpler handling of both cases with same golang code. |
f11c32a
to
9d5c760
Compare
Appreciate the update! Could you please keep the refactoring and functional changes separate? It just makes it hard to review. I can't even tell which refactoring are to support the feature here and which are "just because", e.g. it's not at all clear why this requires a change the the golang code. |
I think only refactoring here is to move things out from index.ts for clarity. I can revert so that index.ts has all things that are not needed also on other options, but it feels non-optimal solution. Lambda needs changes as handler currently handles only event from CloudFormation. When step is added to CodePipeline, it has to handle different event, and also return the execution information to the pipeline. Refactorings could be separated to another commit before adding new functionality, but I don't see that helping the review as "why" might be hard to see with that commit alone. |
yarn.lock
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
revert pls
lambda/go.mod
Outdated
@@ -1,11 +1,14 @@ | |||
module cdk-ecr-deployment-handler | |||
|
|||
go 1.15 | |||
go 1.21 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
revert or explain why this is needed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Go mod tidy seemed to change this automatically. Build uses public.ecr.aws/sam/build-go1.x:latest
which has go 1.22.1, but have to check if this works as should with Go 1.15.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Seems that aws-sdk-go-v2 requires (according https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2) Go 1.21. Not sure how those earlier ones have worked, or then this is always built with newer version than mentioned to be requirement on go.mod.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Okay, you can probably guess my request to pull this update out into a separate PR 🙈
Sorry that this issue is bringing up so many maintenance tasks.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK, running those commands to check go.mod with older golang, as newer ones would update that automatically including also "toolchain" version there.
It helps someone like me who is not super familiar with golang. |
For Golang changes there's not really refactoring due to refactoring (except extra struct), but to prevent to have 2 handles with 80% same code (parsing of inputs and copying image). It can be done with more copy-paste way as inputs at the end are same |
I appreciate your concern. Whether options include unnecessary options seems completely unrelated to the setup of the project in a single file vs multiple files. Definitely open to that refactor, but make it as a separate PR please. |
lambda/utils.go
Outdated
// User parametes. Note that Keys should match to event parameters unless specifying separate json keys | ||
type UserParameters struct { | ||
SrcImage string | ||
SrcCreds string | ||
DestImage string | ||
DestCreds string | ||
} | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
These seems like a refactor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
True, modified the code different way that I would not like, but increasing technical debt then :)
1dca2bc
to
ad72002
Compare
Now I think all functions/interfaces that are moved from file to file are done to get Refactored version was tested also within actual CodePipeline, this version without those refactoring isn't (yet). |
Support both codepipeline and pipelines
ad72002
to
cb71f63
Compare
So would be be better to include the new functionality to index.ts, and just put also all new (helper) functions there? And make that separation of files completely on other PR? Or is the current way of adding new files already for new functionalities (and helpers) OK? |
Fixes #201