Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 12, 2022. It is now read-only.

Platform argument not followed unless repo URL matches satisfies the string pattern #798

Closed
7 tasks done
ElanHasson opened this issue May 22, 2019 · 7 comments
Closed
7 tasks done
Labels

Comments

@ElanHasson
Copy link

🔙 Regression

Platform config value is ignored unless the repository URL matches the string pattern in the platform ISettingsReader implementation.

Old (and correct) behavior

Doesn't seem to have worked.

Current behavior

Platform is ignored unless Repository URL matches the string pattern.

Reproduction steps

nukeeper repo https://myserver/projects/org/reponame token fails because the URL doesn't match any of the platform ISettingsReader implementation.
nukeeper repo --platform Bitbucketlocal https://myserver/projects/org/reponame token fails because there is no logic to short circuit the string pattern matching if platform is specified.

Configuration

Version: 0.21.2

Platform if applicable:

  • 🛠️ NuKeeper CLI
  • ✨ GitHub
  • 🤖 AzureDevops
  • 🏁 Bitbucket
  • 🌎 Gitlab
  • 📺 Gitea
  • 🐳 Docker
@ElanHasson
Copy link
Author

See #590 also.

@shep1987 shep1987 added the bug label May 23, 2019
@jwmoffat
Copy link

I can confirm this as well.

I've been trying to get it to work on version 0.21.3 with gitlab.

Without any flag, I get the error "Unable to work out which platform to use [URL] could not be matched"

At first I thought I was setting the platform flag incorrectly, but if you give it an invalid option it prints out "Invalid value specified for platform. Allowed values are: GitHub, AzureDevOps, Bitbucket, BitbucketLocal, GitLab, Gitea"

However, even with a valid platform flag, I still get the same original error.

Changing my URL (via a hosts entry in Windows) to include "gitlab" in the URL then allows it to move forward.

@msallin
Copy link
Member

msallin commented Jun 13, 2019

There is currently an issue with our local Bitbucket installation, which prevents me from testing and I'm also not sure if I catched the root of the issue. Please review and test.

#821

@zubivan
Copy link
Contributor

zubivan commented Jun 13, 2019

Also observed this behaviour, great that you're fixing it!

@StephanTuinder
Copy link
Contributor

My 2 cents: It seems to be ignored in the "repo" mode

@msallin
Copy link
Member

msallin commented Oct 24, 2019

@ElanHasson close the issue?

@ElanHasson
Copy link
Author

I haven't had a chance to revisit this. I'll close for now and reopen if I see it again

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants