MGMT-16359: support configured extensions in resource server #47
Conversation
|
@danielerez: This pull request references MGMT-16359 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the task to target the "4.16.0" version, but no target version was set. In response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
danielerez
force-pushed
the
extensions_resource_jq
branch
2 times, most recently
from
c05bb67
to
9f5dec8
Compare
internal/service/resource_handler.go
Outdated
| } | ||
| labelsMap := data.GetLabelsMap(labels) | ||
|
|
||
| r.logger.Error(fmt.Sprintf("r.extensions: %v", r.extensions)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You will probably want to remove this, or replace it with r.logger.Debug(...).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good catch:) Removed.
| SetExtensions( | ||
| `{ | ||
| "operation_system": .label|parse_labels|.os, | ||
| "architecture": .label|parse_labels|.arch |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is really nice @danielerez!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This looks good to me. Thanks @danielerez. The only reason I am not approving it is that you may want to change address the comment about logging before merging. Let me know and I will happily approve.
Similarly to the support add in deployment manager server,
this PR is adding a similar functionality to the resource server.
The main difference between the implementations is the parsing
logic of the objects retrieved from search API.
I.e. since each 'label' property is a single string consists
of key=value pairs, the lables should be parsed before
evaluating the expression with jq.
Hence, added a custom jq function for parsing: `parse_labels`.
For example:
```
--extensions={
"openshift_version": .label|parse_labels|.openshiftVersion,
"cluster_set": .label|parse_labels|.\"cluster.open-cluster-management.io/clusterset\",
}
```
danielerez
force-pushed
the
extensions_resource_jq
branch
from
9f5dec8
to
1a2ce48
Compare
|
/lgtm |
Similarly to the support add in deployment manager server, this PR is adding a similar functionality to the resource server. The main difference between the implementations is the parsing logic of the objects retrieved from search API.
I.e. since each 'label' property is a single string consists of key=value pairs, the lables should be parsed before evaluating the expression with jq. Hence, added a custom jq function for parsing:
parse_labels.For example: