feat(apigateway): WebSocketIntegrationResponse implementation
#29661
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
distinguished-contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The pull request linter has failed. See the aws-cdk-automation comment below for failure reasons. If you believe this pull request should receive an exemption, please comment and provide a justification.
A comment requesting an exemption should contain the text Exemption Request. Additionally, if clarification is needed add Clarification Request to a comment.
| // FIXME change to a warning? | ||
| throw new Error('Setting up integration responses without setting up returnResponse to true will have no effect, and is likely a mistake.'); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure which is best here, as far as I can tell the web console (and thus I assume Cfn) allows the user to create responses, with a simple notice:
It does feel like quite a big pitfall though, I don't think an exception is unwarranted
| /** | ||
| * Integration response ID | ||
| */ | ||
| public readonly integrationResponseId?: string; | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I assume this was added in anticipation of an implementation of integration responses, but serves no purpose and cannot store multiple responses
| // FIXME any better way to generate a unique id? | ||
| Names.nodeUniqueId(this.integration.node) + slugify(responseProps.responseKey.key) + 'IntegrationResponse', | ||
| { ...responseProps, integration: this.integration }, | ||
| ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unsure this is the best way to generate this ID, feedback would be appreciated
|
|
aws-cdk-automation
dismissed
their stale review
✅ Updated pull request passes all PRLinter validations. Dismissing previous PRLinter review.
aws-cdk-automation
added
the
pr/needs-community-review
|
This PR cannot be merged because it has conflicts. Please resolve them. The PR will be considered stale and closed if it remains in an unmergeable state. |
…ebsocket-integration-response
…ebsocket-integration-response
AWS CodeBuild CI Report
Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository |
Issue # (if applicable)
None as far as I could tell, related to #29562.
Reason for this change
While it is possible to use the L1
CfnIntegrationResponseconstruct, it's not trivial given theWebSocketRouteIntegrationare currently bound to theWebSocketIntegrationon the fly.Description of changes
WebSocketIntegrationResponseconstructWebSocketIntegrations (capable of settingIntegrationResponse) aresponsesconfig prop, as well as aaddResponsemethod. This allows me to check that there are no repeatresponseKeys, and thatreturnResponseis active if there areresponsessetCustomResponseWebSocketRouteabstract class was created to isolateWebSocketLambdaIntegration, which does not support response customizationWebSocketIntegrationResponseKeyhelper class to access common and to generate customresponseKeysAlso, and this was not the intent of this PR, but I found some missing properties for
WebSocketMockIntegrationwhile updating its integ test:requestTemplatesandtemplateSelectionExpressionto the newly createdWebSocketMockIntegrationPropsDescription of how you validated changes
Unit tests were added/modified, and existing integration files were extended to include responses
Checklist
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license