[Activity changes] Add applied_spec_software activity #24913
Conversation
|
@rachaelshaw Oh right! Let me see about moving this to a branch. Sorry! |
eugkuo
requested review from
a team,
Sampfluger88,
edwardsb,
georgekarrv,
ksatter,
lukeheath,
rfairburn and
sharon-fdm
as code owners
rachaelshaw
temporarily deployed
to
Docker Hub
GitHub Actions
Inactive
|
@eugkuo converting this PR to a draft; changing the base branch always seems to result in massive diffs (183 files changed 🫠) and auto-requests reviews from all the codeowners. I'm not sure how to fix it other than making a new PR.
|
rachaelshaw
removed request for
a team,
eashaw,
edwardsb,
georgekarrv and
lukeheath
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## docs-v4.63.0 #24913 +/- ##
================================================
+ Coverage 63.56% 63.59% +0.02%
================================================
Files 1603 1603
Lines 151958 152006 +48
Branches 3900 3871 -29
================================================
+ Hits 96590 96661 +71
+ Misses 47667 47650 -17
+ Partials 7701 7695 -6
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Thanks for doing this. Does that mean we should update the process here? |
noahtalerman
changed the title
| } | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| ## applied_spec_software |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Dev note
Activity is generated when GitOps runs and there is at least one software (package, App Store app, or Fleet-maintained app) is specified in the YAML's software: https://fleetdm.com/docs/configuration/yaml-files#software
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I want to say this is a reversal from the (potentially inconsistently applied) pattern of "GitOps applies don't show up in the activity feed"? Seems like if we want them to show up we'd want the existing app add/edit/delete events for consistency with what manual actions add to the feed, but maybe I'm missing something?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why are adding this? There's a missing gap in activities for GitOps right now: software isn't mentioned. I think let's stick with the current pattern now to keep changes small.
we'd want the existing app add/edit/delete
Eventually we can come back to more specific language and addressing the problem of only showing activities if something changed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As we're digging back into this post-user-story-review, heads-up that the software gitops endpoints (packages and VPP apps) are always called 1x each per team, at least with Fleet Premium, and currently e.g. the script batch endpoint adds an activity whenever it's called, even if no scripts are supplied (because the bulk action may have deleted all scripts).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Got it! Thanks for checking.
If I'm understanding correctly, it sounds like this new applied_spec_activity will be consistent with the other applied_spec activities. I think that's what we want 👍
Co-authored-by: Ian Littman <iansltx@gmail.com>
| { | ||
| "team_id": 123, | ||
| "team_name": "Workstations", | ||
| "software": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@eugkuo @iansltx I just pushed some tweaks.
I think it would be nice if this matched the structure of software key in the YAML: https://fleetdm.com/docs/configuration/yaml-files#software
What do y'all think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Adding VPP into the mix would significantly affect level of effort
@iansltx by how many points you think? Might be worth it to hit VPP while we're doing this. So we don't forget to do it and never come back to it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Minimum +3, since in order to avoid broadcasting an activity when no software was provided but also broadcast an activity when software was deleted, we would need to merge VPP batch and software installer batch endpoints so we have a clear picture of before/after.
Additionally, right now fleetctl applies software packages and then VPP apps and without further digging I can't say whether that order of operations is significant. So either that order doesn't matter or it's an unknown-sized can of worms. Thinking more likely the latter since we're talking about GitOps code here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Re: the software key, if I'm consuming this JSON I'd rather iterate over one set of items and filter/null-check slug if I care about FMA, vs. iterating over two nearly identical keys (I had thought about splitting FMA out).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@iansltx I think let's keep VPP in this pass. So we can get it all the way done while we're at it.
Re: the software key, if I'm consuming this JSON
I'll defer to you and @rachaelshaw (API design DRI) here. Please feel free to update the PR with your proposed changes.
iansltx
changed the title
|
@rachaelshaw Okee. I converted this to draft and I believe I just manually requested your review. LMK if I messed anything up. |
|
Closing this PR because we decided to de-prioritize the user story for now. |
6 participants
Activity changes for the following user story: