Allow explicit empty security definition to overwrite existing definitions #666

co3k · 2018-06-09T09:22:22Z

It enables to clear default security configuration in operationObject.Security (to make public api).

protoc-gen-swagger doesn't allow empty array (and it causes segfault) in operationObject.Security but it is really needed resetting security requirement configuration by Swagger.

co3k · 2018-06-09T12:44:32Z

I wonder why the https://travis-ci.org/grpc-ecosystem/grpc-gateway/builds/390065893 build fails in Go: 1.10.x, GATEWAY_PLUGIN_FLAGS= job. Can anyone advice me to solve this problem?

yugui · 2018-06-10T10:30:55Z

The test failure looks to be because some of example files are out-of-date. c.f. golang/protobuf@05f48f4#diff-8c603013608023320d5242916c4ea03bR1571

Would you mind running make clean && make examples to let the files catch the change in protoc-gen-go?

co3k · 2018-06-10T15:38:19Z

@yugui
Thank you for your response, but I can't get any diffs by running that command on my macOS.

$ go version
go version go1.10.3 darwin/amd64

$ protoc --version
libprotoc 3.5.1

$ brew info protobuf
protobuf: stable 3.5.1 (bottled), HEAD
Protocol buffers (Google's data interchange format)
https://github.com/google/protobuf/
/usr/local/Cellar/protobuf/3.2.0_1 (257 files, 15.9MB)
  Poured from bottle on 2017-04-28 at 18:02:34
/usr/local/Cellar/protobuf/3.5.1_1 (267 files, 18.5MB) *
  Poured from bottle on 2018-06-11 at 00:22:59
From: https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/blob/master/Formula/protobuf.rb
==> Dependencies
Build: autoconf ✔, automake ✔, libtool ✔
Recommended: python@2 ✔
Optional: python ✘
==> Options
--with-python
	Build with python support
--with-test
	Run build-time check
--without-python@2
	Build without python2 support
--HEAD
	Install HEAD version
==> Caveats
Editor support and examples have been installed to:
  /usr/local/opt/protobuf/share/doc/protobuf

$ cd $GOPATH/src/github.com/golang/protobuf/protoc-gen-go; git log -1 --oneline; cd -
05f48f4 (HEAD -> master, origin/master, origin/HEAD) proto: revert UTF-8 validation for proto2 (#628)

$ make clean && make examples
rm -f bin/protoc-gen-grpc-gateway bin/protoc-gen-swagger
go build -o bin/protoc-gen-grpc-gateway github.com/grpc-ecosystem/grpc-gateway/protoc-gen-grpc-gateway
**SNIP**

$ git status
On branch allow-empty-array-in-security
nothing to commit, working tree clean

$ make clean && make test
rm -f bin/protoc-gen-grpc-gateway bin/protoc-gen-swagger
go build -o bin/protoc-gen-grpc-gateway github.com/grpc-ecosystem/grpc-gateway/protoc-gen-grpc-gateway
**SNIP**

$ git status             
On branch allow-empty-array-in-security
nothing to commit, working tree clean

co3k · 2018-06-11T03:05:37Z

The error has been fixed at d1985fc .
I might need to run make realclean && make examples for solving this problem.
Thanks again to yugui!

The https://travis-ci.org/grpc-ecosystem/grpc-gateway/jobs/390576866 job for Go: 1.9.x, GATEWAY_PLUGIN_FLAGS= has been timed out.
Is it a temporary error? But I cannot retry this job because I don't have permission to do so.

tmc · 2018-06-17T23:09:31Z

@co3k thanks for your contribution, can you rebase this so CI runs again?

co3k · 2018-06-20T13:45:25Z

@tmc Thanks for your response but the https://travis-ci.org/grpc-ecosystem/grpc-gateway/jobs/394549559#L554-L557 test is failed that is due to timed out in go get phase. I cannot rebase it again because the upstream is not updated yet. How should I do next?

johanbrandhorst · 2018-06-20T15:08:22Z

I have re-triggered the job.

johanbrandhorst · 2018-06-20T15:09:31Z

protoc-gen-swagger/genswagger/types.go

@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ type swaggerOperationObject struct {
 	Tags        []string                `json:"tags,omitempty"`
 	Deprecated  bool                    `json:"deprecated,omitempty"`

-	Security     []swaggerSecurityRequirementObject  `json:"security,omitempty"`
+	Security     *[]swaggerSecurityRequirementObject `json:"security,omitempty"`


Is this required? Can't we just have an empty slice?

Required. The omitempty tag removes an empty slice. However we don't want to print null value in every JSON response so we can't remove this omitempty tag.

johanbrandhorst · 2018-06-20T15:12:18Z

protoc-gen-swagger/genswagger/template.go

-						} else {
-							newSecurity = operationObject.Security
+						if operationObject.Security != nil {
+							newSecurity = *operationObject.Security
 						}


Can we not just set newSecurity = nil when operationObject.Security == nil?

I think we really need empty slice in this case.

johanbrandhorst · 2018-06-21T08:02:17Z

As with the other PR, could you please squash the commits? Thank you.

johanbrandhorst · 2018-06-21T08:06:01Z

examples/proto/examplepb/a_bit_of_everything.proto

@@ -274,6 +274,8 @@ service ABitOfEverythingService {
 				url: "https://github.com/grpc-ecosystem/grpc-gateway";
 				description: "Find out more about GetQuery";
 			}
+		  security: {
+      }


The indendation of this line seems off, are you using spaces instead of tabs?

Sorry, I've fixed it in a78ff38 (I'll squash this commit later)

johanbrandhorst · 2018-06-21T08:07:17Z

Could you also please reword this title, description and commit message to clearly state the intent please? Something along the lines of:

Allow explicit empty security definition to overwrite existing definitions.

…tions. It enables to clear default security configuration in operationObject.Security (to make public api). protoc-gen-swagger doesn't allow empty array (and it causes segfault) in operationObject.Security but it is really needed resetting security requirement configuration by Swagger.

…ation

codecov-io · 2018-06-23T15:32:30Z

Codecov Report

Merging #666 into master will decrease coverage by 0.07%.
The diff coverage is 0%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #666      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   56.49%   56.42%   -0.08%     
==========================================
  Files          30       30              
  Lines        3004     3006       +2     
==========================================
- Hits         1697     1696       -1     
- Misses       1144     1146       +2     
- Partials      163      164       +1

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
protoc-gen-swagger/genswagger/types.go	`19.04% <ø> (ø)`	⬆️
protoc-gen-swagger/genswagger/template.go	`38.47% <0%> (+0.19%)`	⬆️
runtime/errors.go	`37.66% <0%> (-7.41%)`	⬇️
runtime/marshal_json.go	`83.33% <0%> (+16.66%)`	⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 11bef10...dcd2104. Read the comment docs.

co3k · 2018-06-23T15:38:35Z

@johanbrandhorst Thanks for your advice! I've squashed commits and changed the title of this pull request and the first commit to follow your suggestion.

johanbrandhorst · 2018-06-23T17:55:28Z

Thank you for your contribution!

googlebot added the cla: yes label Jun 9, 2018

co3k force-pushed the allow-empty-array-in-security branch from d1985fc to 4f318d7 Compare June 20, 2018 13:01

johanbrandhorst reviewed Jun 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

johanbrandhorst reviewed Jun 21, 2018

View reviewed changes

co3k added 2 commits June 24, 2018 00:20

Change GetQuery to be a public api by clear default security configur…

dcd2104

…ation

co3k force-pushed the allow-empty-array-in-security branch from a78ff38 to dcd2104 Compare June 23, 2018 15:21

co3k changed the title ~~Enable to clear default security configuration in operationObject.Security (to make public api)~~ Allow explicit empty security definition to overwrite existing definitions Jun 23, 2018

johanbrandhorst merged commit ee3ef70 into grpc-ecosystem:master Jun 23, 2018

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Allow explicit empty security definition to overwrite existing definitions #666

Allow explicit empty security definition to overwrite existing definitions #666

co3k commented Jun 9, 2018 •

edited

Loading

co3k commented Jun 9, 2018

yugui commented Jun 10, 2018

co3k commented Jun 10, 2018

co3k commented Jun 11, 2018

tmc commented Jun 17, 2018

co3k commented Jun 20, 2018

johanbrandhorst commented Jun 20, 2018

johanbrandhorst Jun 20, 2018

co3k Jun 21, 2018 •

edited

Loading

johanbrandhorst Jun 21, 2018

johanbrandhorst Jun 20, 2018

co3k Jun 21, 2018

johanbrandhorst Jun 21, 2018

johanbrandhorst commented Jun 21, 2018

johanbrandhorst Jun 21, 2018

co3k Jun 21, 2018

johanbrandhorst commented Jun 21, 2018

codecov-io commented Jun 23, 2018

co3k commented Jun 23, 2018

johanbrandhorst commented Jun 23, 2018

Allow explicit empty security definition to overwrite existing definitions #666

Allow explicit empty security definition to overwrite existing definitions #666

Conversation

co3k commented Jun 9, 2018 • edited Loading

co3k commented Jun 9, 2018

yugui commented Jun 10, 2018

co3k commented Jun 10, 2018

co3k commented Jun 11, 2018

tmc commented Jun 17, 2018

co3k commented Jun 20, 2018

johanbrandhorst commented Jun 20, 2018

johanbrandhorst Jun 20, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

co3k Jun 21, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

johanbrandhorst Jun 21, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

johanbrandhorst Jun 20, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

co3k Jun 21, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

johanbrandhorst Jun 21, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

johanbrandhorst commented Jun 21, 2018

johanbrandhorst Jun 21, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

co3k Jun 21, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

johanbrandhorst commented Jun 21, 2018

codecov-io commented Jun 23, 2018

Codecov Report

co3k commented Jun 23, 2018

johanbrandhorst commented Jun 23, 2018

co3k commented Jun 9, 2018 •

edited

Loading

co3k Jun 21, 2018 •

edited

Loading