-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7.4k
fix: adding a -- separator for spi options #40005
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
Conversation
cc9ccb0
to
10c501a
Compare
@vmuzikar are you ok with this being a breaking change from the perspective of users who are relying on auto-builds with -provider, -provider-default, -enabled? If so I can add a note for that. And / or do you want a warning for now for the possibly ambiguous cases? |
Unreported flaky test detectedIf the flaky tests below are affected by the changes, please review and update the changes accordingly. Otherwise, a maintainer should report the flaky tests prior to merging the PR. org.keycloak.testsuite.webauthn.account.WebAuthnSigningInTest#checkAuthenticatorTimeLocaleKeycloak CI - WebAuthn IT (chrome)
|
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.
Unreported flaky test detected, please review
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.
are you ok with this being a breaking change from the perspective of users who are relying on auto-builds with -provider, -provider-default, -enabled? If so I can add a note for that.
Yes, please add a note to the upgrading guide about that. Maybe with some reasoning about it.
And / or do you want a warning for now for the possibly ambiguous cases?
You mean to the docs? Definitely yes. I know you've done some updates to the docs but IMHO we need to be much more explicit. Basically to explain the difference between the two forms and the auto build behaviour. It might very easily get confusing to the users.
Additionally, I think we should update all docs occurences to the --
format.
Updated with a warning when changed the docs to use the new format. There's still a reference to spi-authentication-sessions-map-auth-sessions-limit (now spi-authentication-sessions--map--auth-sessions-limit) that should be removed correct? |
Also updated to internally map to the new spi form - this also highlighted that the PropertyMapper logic needs to maintain an additional mapping to the legacy form. |
bd4744e
to
ae2a768
Compare
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.
@shawkins Nice work! Using --
separator makes these SPI separations more visible and I like it more than before.
Just added some small comments that might improve things a little bit more IMO.
docs/documentation/upgrading/topics/changes/changes-26_3_0.adoc
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
docs/documentation/upgrading/topics/changes/changes-26_3_0.adoc
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
docs/documentation/upgrading/topics/changes/changes-26_3_0.adoc
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
docs/documentation/upgrading/topics/changes/changes-26_3_0.adoc
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...untime/src/main/java/org/keycloak/quarkus/runtime/configuration/mappers/PropertyMappers.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Thank you for the review. Applied the suggestions. |
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.
@shawkins Looks good, but one last thing - we should move these upgrading notes you provided to the "Notable changes" section and probably not to the "Breaking changes". Or is there anything I missed?
docs/documentation/upgrading/topics/changes/changes-26_3_0.adoc
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
adding + + inlining where needed Signed-off-by: Steve Hawkins <shawkins@redhat.com>
@mabartos had to correct the generated options output as well, along with a few more places where -- was missing or being rendered incorrectly. |
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.
LGTM
Unreported flaky test detectedIf the flaky tests below are affected by the changes, please review and update the changes accordingly. Otherwise, a maintainer should report the flaky tests prior to merging the PR. org.keycloak.testsuite.cluster.RealmInvalidationClusterTest#crudWithFailoverKeycloak CI - Store IT (postgres)
|
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.
Unreported flaky test detected, please review
I plan to give this a quick look later today. |
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.
@shawkins Sorry for the late review and thank you for the changes!
Overall LGTM but might be good to add some tests for checking the selected SPI options are correctly treated as buildtime.
Additionally, I wonder if we should have a test for the env var form, if __
works as expected.
Can you also please rebase? |
We already had a test or two along those lines (see StartCommandDistTest.errorSpiBuildtimeAtRuntime for example), and the arquilian logic relies on implicit rebuilds due to provider option changes.
I can certainly add something. The replacement logic in KcEnvConfigSource is now quite straight-forward all _ in a non-wildcard key will become -, so there's nothing special about this case. |
Signed-off-by: Steven Hawkins <shawkins@redhat.com>
But we don't cover all the SPI build time options (i.e.
Yeah, it'd be good to have something to make sure that e.g. Quarkus doesn't messes that up somewhere. |
I'll add something after lunch.
Quarkus? These entries are only handled by Keycloak logic. |
Yeah, but I meant some too smart interceptors maybe. Still I'd feel safer with some tests. :) |
Signed-off-by: Steve Hawkins <shawkins@redhat.com>
See if the the additional changes are sufficient. |
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.
LGTM, thank you.
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.
LGTM
closes: #39063