Support both old and new DS field names #51
Merged
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
This was referenced Sep 24, 2023
|
/cc @baest let me know what you think of this. If you're 👍 we can just move forward with it and solve octodns/octodns#1065 (comment) |
|
@ross Looks good! Let's go with this 👍 |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This reworks octodns-powerdns's handling of DS fields so that it's dynamically compabile with both the old (wrong) field names and new corrected ones. Once this is merged we should be able to cut a release that will be comptible with the past and future DS record support cleanly without any further effort required.
/cc #49 which added DS support
/cc #50 which this replaces
/cc octodns/octodns#1065 which this updates octodns-powerdns to transparently handle