-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 244
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
Improvement/cldsrv 191 bump arsenal post breaking changes dev8x #4493
Improvement/cldsrv 191 bump arsenal post breaking changes dev8x #4493
Conversation
Hello xinliscality,My role is to assist you with the merge of this Status report is not available. |
Incorrect fix versionThe
Considering where you are trying to merge, I ignored possible hotfix versions and I expected to find:
Please check the |
Waiting for approvalThe following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:
|
7525709
to
3a20f69
Compare
Would it be possible to target 7.10 with this one? |
Hi Ronnie, @miniscruff |
5150705
to
b1d824c
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.
LGTM, just two little improvements we can do.
tests/functional/aws-node-sdk/test/object/getObjectLegalHold.js
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
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.
Nice work!
You can kill ec68150f33babaad08395fa13cfd0d133d5c356d
and squash d0bf45eccc09591634e3e2067e94564996ef0c36
into 3b2725f209e572231f1aadb0c3c588063fa4b269
🙂
We should get some green Zenko smoke tests before merging this, to be extra safe.
82dda9e
to
b37e4a9
Compare
should this PR not target 8.2 ? |
35b4ba2
to
5b2baf2
Compare
Hi @francoisferrand , we are going to open dev/8.5 branch very soon, we want to maintain only the latest two branches, so I only target dev/8.4 |
Maintaining 2 versions means 8.3 and 8.4 in addition to the Dev branch (8.5) But my point is that the fix will land in 8.2, due to waterflow : so best to avoid extra/redundant work, and just target 8.2 Changes from your PR should be minimal I guess, and there is no extra work with federation/integration in this case. |
yeah, I understand. But I am not sure I can do this, rebasing to 8.2 will need some extra time, I am not sure I can still lose time for cold storage, I will check with PO quickly. |
hi @francoisferrand, sorry, I may not be able to do it this time, targeting 8.2 and 8.3 will bring a lot of extra work like rebasing and especially testing end2end in zenko, we don't want to add more risks to cold storage. But I will help to review the PR targeting 7.10 and also its integration PRs, hope can accelerate the migrating speed :) |
b32f6a9
to
582aa4e
Compare
@@ -396,7 +396,8 @@ function multiObjectDelete(authInfo, request, log, callback) { | |||
return vault.checkPolicies(requestContextParams, authInfo.getArn(), | |||
log, (err, authorizationResults) => { | |||
// there were no policies so received a blanket AccessDenied | |||
if (err.is.AccessDenied) { | |||
log.info('please see here: ', { err, authorizationResults }); |
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.
Stray log?
5edee36
to
03fa7d0
Compare
/approve |
In the queueThe changeset has received all authorizations and has been added to the The changeset will be merged in:
The following branches will NOT be impacted:
There is no action required on your side. You will be notified here once IMPORTANT Please do not attempt to modify this pull request.
If you need this pull request to be removed from the queue, please contact a The following options are set: approve |
I have successfully merged the changeset of this pull request
The following branches have NOT changed:
Please check the status of the associated issue CLDSRV-191. Goodbye xinliscality. |
use an arsenal commit hashtag for testing, will replace it with 8.1.45 once it's released.
this PR is mainly doing two things:
err.is.Error
instead of===
error equal,assert.strictEqual(err.is.Error, true)
instead ofdeepStrictEqual(err, errors.Error)
InvalidArgument
error instead ofNoSuchVersion
error that we expect. So even for non existing versionId, we have to give it a standard formated versionId, so I replaced several places where we use000000000
for non existing versionId with a meaningful but also non existing versionId. b1d824cgreen build in zenko https://eve.devsca.com/github/scality/zenko/#/builders/4/builds/21334