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

Bug 1538986 - Remove bad enum values from Update Request #713

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Feb 2, 2018
Merged

Bug 1538986 - Remove bad enum values from Update Request #713

merged 2 commits into from Feb 2, 2018

Conversation

jmontleon
Copy link
Contributor

@jmontleon jmontleon commented Jan 31, 2018

Describe what this PR does and why we need it:
Fix a bug

Changes proposed in this pull request

  • Drop requested parameter updates with invalid enum values

Does this PR depend on another PR (Use this to track when PRs should be merged)
Doesn't depend on anything else.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jan 31, 2018
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jan 31, 2018
Copy link
Member

@djzager djzager left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ACK

@shawn-hurley
Copy link
Contributor

I think that this line also needs to get updated so that we return the 2xx when the new no parameters changes error occurs.

@jmontleon
Copy link
Contributor Author

@shawn-hurley I think this is no longer an issue with the most recent set of changes.

Copy link
Contributor

@shawn-hurley shawn-hurley left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just one small question otherwise LGTM

Method: apb.JobMethodUpdate,
})

return &UpdateResponse{"noop-update"}, nil
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This might seem silly, but this would be constantly overwriting the same job I believe. I wonder if generating a UUID for the token even for the noop might make sense?

Copy link
Contributor

@jmrodri jmrodri left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

okay, ack

@jmrodri
Copy link
Contributor

jmrodri commented Feb 1, 2018

@jmontleon needs a PR against release-1.1 branch to be included in 3.9 builds.

@jmrodri jmrodri merged commit 1170fdd into openshift:master Feb 2, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants