-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38.6k
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
update requestScope to fully qualify kind and resource #17956
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What if several groups share the same getOptions in the future? Then the getOptionsGVString may not equal to reqScope.InternalVersion (which is the old behavior).
I prefer the old way, using the reqScope.InternalVersion, which must be correct.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think you may have gotten the fields backwards. The reason we had to have the hack (different version) before was precisely because the
reqScope.InternalVersion
was never correct unless you were in the legacy kube group. For every other group, yourreqScope.InternalVersion
is for your group, but yourgetOptions
were for/v1
(orunversioned
).This code is done in the order that always correct: "Give me an instance of the
getOptions
type you expect and I'll determine the exact internal group."There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry for the continuous questions here, but let me ask one more. It seems the only getOptions in our code base is the PodLogOptions, it's handled at path
/pods/log
, and the reqScope.InternalVersion is "", which is correct. So my question is:when will this happen?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This ends up mattering downstream when you're trying to have compatibility with other APIs. The origin /logs endpoints as a for instance. The final method destination is also shared with
ConnectResource
(the odd refactoring was done as part of theListOptions
work of all things).I think explicitly locating exactly what's needed gives us flexibility where we need it, since query parameters are not currently self-identifying.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the detailed explanation. It makes sense.
One last comment, can we get rid of the reqScope.InternalVersion? It seems no one uses it anymore.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good call. Removed.