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
GetPipelineStateResponse doesn't serialize #517
Comments
I've seen this before in other AWS services and it rings the bell.
Notice the Required: Yes property. By not including it into the response they violate their own contract. I believe that Amazonka's contracts are largely generated from the documentation (and it indeed generates I don't know a good way of fixing it TBH. Definitely this bug should be raised with AWS support, but it may take time for them to fix an issue (or documentation), and the for Amazonka to reflect the change... |
It doesn't surprise me that the blame falls on AWS, however that also makes me less hopeful for a proper fix arriving soon :( With the size of the AWS API this sort of errors in the specification vs the implementation must have popped up before. Is there an established way to deal with it, ideally something better/quicker than "wait for Amazon to get their house in order"? Alternatively, is there a way to "intercept" the response, to pick it up before de-serialisation? |
Oh, and I reported it via the feedback link on the ActionRevision doc page. |
I'm trying to move the scripts I'm using daily from calls-to-awscli-wrapped-in-Python to Haskell using Amazonka. So far it's been going smoothly, but now I've hit a possible bug.
I need to use
getPipelineState
to get to the token of a Manual-Approval stage in the pipeline, but it's failing when serializing the response:When I run
aws codepiline get-pipeline-state --name <name>
I can indeed see thatactionStates[0]
has acurrentRevision
, but that doesn't have a fieldrevisionChangeId
:AFAICS this doesn't really match the documentation of the response that I found, but that might not mean much 🤷♂️
I'm guessing that a possible fix would be to put in a few
Maybe
s in the definition ofActionRevision
. However, I'm new to Amazonka and I'm not sure where to start in order to make such a change (AFAIU the code in question is autogenerated) so hints and pointers would be most welcome.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: