Require that spec.subscriber is set for Subscription.#30
Merged
knative-prow-robot merged 3 commits intoknative:mainfrom Sep 2, 2021
Merged
Require that spec.subscriber is set for Subscription.#30knative-prow-robot merged 3 commits intoknative:mainfrom
knative-prow-robot merged 3 commits intoknative:mainfrom
Conversation
knative-prow-robot
added
approved
duglin
removed
the
approved
duglin
reviewed
Aug 5, 2021
specs/eventing/control-plane.md
Outdated
| during the delivery. | ||
| The `spec.subscriber` destination MUST be set; if the `spec.reply` field is not | ||
| set, [replies](data-plane.md#derived-reply-events) from the `spec.subscriber` | ||
| are discarded. |
Contributor
|
One nit, otherwise looks good |
|
This changes channels, and we might need to make a migration script or bump the version of the Subscription CRD to support this without bricking clusters. |
Contributor
|
/LGTM |
Contributor
|
approved on the TMC Sept 2 call. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: duglin, evankanderson The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
knative-prow-robot
added
the
approved
salaboy
pushed a commit
to salaboy/specs
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 22, 2021
* Require that spec.subscriber is set for Subscription. * Clarify MUST on discard, thanks Doug
creydr
added a commit
to creydr/knative-eventing
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 14, 2022
…o GA As per knative/specs#30 the spec was changed from requiring one of `spec.subscriber` or `spec.reply` to be set to require that `spec.subscriber` is set. As part of this change the `strict-subscriber` feature flag was introduced to disable this validation and promoted to beta (enabled by default) in 1.7 (knative#6473). This commit removes this feature flag again so the validation can't be disabled anymore. Signed-off-by: Christoph Stäbler <cstabler@redhat.com>
5 tasks
creydr
added a commit
to creydr/knative-eventing
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 16, 2022
…o GA As per knative/specs#30 the spec was changed from requiring one of `spec.subscriber` or `spec.reply` to be set to require that `spec.subscriber` is set. As part of this change the `strict-subscriber` feature flag was introduced to disable this validation and promoted to beta (enabled by default) in 1.7 (knative#6473). This commit removes this feature flag again so the validation can't be disabled anymore. Signed-off-by: Christoph Stäbler <cstabler@redhat.com>
creydr
added a commit
to creydr/knative-eventing
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 16, 2022
…o GA As per knative/specs#30 the spec was changed from requiring one of `spec.subscriber` or `spec.reply` to be set to require that `spec.subscriber` is set. As part of this change the `strict-subscriber` feature flag was introduced to disable this validation and promoted to beta (enabled by default) in 1.7 (knative#6473). This commit removes this feature flag again so the validation can't be disabled anymore. Signed-off-by: Christoph Stäbler <cstabler@redhat.com>
knative-prow bot
pushed a commit
to knative/eventing
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 16, 2022
Fixes #5756 As per knative/specs#30 the spec was changed from requiring one of `spec.subscriber` or `spec.reply` to be set to require that `spec.subscriber` is set. As part of this change the `strict-subscriber` feature flag was introduced to disable this validation (#5762) and promoted to beta (enabled by default) in 1.7 (#6473). :broom: This commit removes this feature flag again so the validation can't be disabled anymore. ## Proposed Changes * Remove `strict-subscriber` feature flag * Promote strict subscriber validation to GA ### Pre-review Checklist - [ ] **At least 80% unit test coverage** - [ ] **E2E tests** for any new behavior - [ ] **Docs PR** for any user-facing impact - [ ] **Spec PR** for any new API feature - [ ] **Conformance test** for any change to the spec **Release Note** ```release-note Remove the possibility to disable strict subscriber validation. When the reply field is specified without a subscriber, the reply field won't be used as a subscriber by default and the subscriber validation will fail. ``` Signed-off-by: Christoph Stäbler <cstabler@redhat.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Followup from this comment; we're going to require
spec.subscriberon both Triggers and Channels;spec.replyis optional for Channels.