-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
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
Don't send writeOnly properties if they're also createOnly #1448
Conversation
Does the PR have any schema changes?Looking good! No breaking changes found. |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1448 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 23.72% 24.60% +0.87%
==========================================
Files 31 32 +1
Lines 4446 4475 +29
==========================================
+ Hits 1055 1101 +46
+ Misses 3227 3208 -19
- Partials 164 166 +2 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
This test _can_ be run manually to prove the change works as expected, but the resources involved make this unfeasible to enable right now as an automated test.
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.
Code change makes sense to me, but I’m missing a unit test with it
- Inline schema property specs. - Add exclusion of create-only properties when appending to the patch.
- Re-purpose existing tests to run against both implementations. - Fix leading "/" in write-only property paths.
Make the outputs of typed and untyped diffing exactly the same (apart from case conversion).
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 that you were able to bring the patch logic for extension and other resources together with this change.
I did have on significant concern about the introduction of a createOnly
property on the ExtensionResource, but otherwise just a few nits.
- Improve comments & documentation. - Tweak how we do sorting of keys.
ec8345a
to
64e78dc
Compare
Yeh it takes very long for the |
Fixes #1435
Ideally we'd have an integration test around this case to avoid future regression but currently the VPC-based test is very unstable, so has been disabled, but included for documentation of the issues.
aws-native:ec2:IpamPoolCidr
regularly fails with"GeneralServiceException": Error occurred during operation 'The CIDR has one or more allocations.'
even after the VPC is deleted for serveral minutes.aws-native:ec2:IpamPool
fails with"NotStabilized": IpamPoolCidrFailureReason(Message=The CIDR has one or more allocations.
aws-native:ec2:IpamPool
fails due to a diff in theprovisionedCidrs
property.Extracted the patch generation code instead and wrote a unit around it. Also replicated the fix into the untyped ExtensionResource implementation and tested using the same test suite.