Skip to content
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

Allow create access for SelfSubjectAccessReview #766

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Mar 15, 2023

Conversation

rottencandy
Copy link
Contributor

@rottencandy rottencandy commented Mar 14, 2023

Add create permission for SelfSubjectAccessReview to allow for RBAC checks in UI.

Test repo PR: codeready-toolchain/toolchain-e2e#681

@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 14, 2023

Hi @rottencandy. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a codeready-toolchain member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@alexeykazakov
Copy link
Contributor

/ok-to-test

- apiGroups:
- authorization.k8s.io
resources:
- selfsubjectaccessreview
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

correct me if I'm wrong, but it should be in the plural form, right?:

Suggested change
- selfsubjectaccessreview
- selfsubjectaccessreviews

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

btw, is selfsubjectaccessreview the only one that is used by UI, or does it also use SubjectAccessReview?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, it should be in the plural form indeed! I keep missing it when reviewing those PRs :(

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Updated!

The UI doesn't need to check access for users other than the current user, so SubjectAccessReview is not needed.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 15, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #766 (59a1143) into master (6b9d988) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #766   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   82.62%   82.62%           
=======================================
  Files          50       50           
  Lines        4908     4908           
=======================================
  Hits         4055     4055           
  Misses        696      696           
  Partials      157      157           

@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 15, 2023

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: alexeykazakov, MatousJobanek, rottencandy

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
  • OWNERS [MatousJobanek,alexeykazakov]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@MatousJobanek MatousJobanek merged commit 646e319 into codeready-toolchain:master Mar 15, 2023
8 checks passed
rottencandy added a commit to rottencandy/host-operator that referenced this pull request Mar 16, 2023
MatousJobanek pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2023
This reverts commit 646e319.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants