-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 954
feat: add auth_mode for explicit auth configuration #3246
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
Open
laughedelic
wants to merge
11
commits into
integrations:main
Choose a base branch
from
laughedelic:feat/auth-mode-rework
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
11 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
a6adf15
add top-level app creds and a helper function
laughedelic 4c9ede5
add explicit auth_mode configuration
laughedelic 06ad80f
update auth example
laughedelic 7761220
add auth_mode tests
laughedelic a2010f5
rename app_pem_file to app_private_key
laughedelic 91625cf
update authentication docs
laughedelic e07604b
Use tflog in providerConfigure instead of log.Printf
laughedelic c33ccb5
Use diag.Errorf instead of diag.FromErr(fmt.Errorf
laughedelic e3264c4
Add mutual ConflictsWith between the new top-level parameters and the
laughedelic af6fb59
Validate auth_mode for top-level app fields and add tests for edge cases
laughedelic 3e17470
Merge branch 'main' into feat/auth-mode-rework
laughedelic File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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.
Could you add
ConflictsWithfields so that it's not possible to set both App auth configs at the same time? Or does that interfere with theDefaultFuncbeing the same?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 don't think it interferes with the default value, but it probably doesn't raise the conflict when everything is set through env vars. In any case, I added mutually exclusive ConflictsWith in e3264c4. And further validation is done in
providerConfigure.