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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Extend CEL rules to nested structs #239

Closed
lsviben opened this issue Jul 27, 2023 · 1 comment
Closed

Extend CEL rules to nested structs #239

lsviben opened this issue Jul 27, 2023 · 1 comment
Assignees
@lsviben

Comments

@lsviben
Copy link
Contributor

lsviben commented Jul 27, 2023

With the introduction of #237 , we have made all the generated spec.forProvider fields which are also spec.initProvider fields non-required in the schema, as they can be set either in one or the other. This means that there is no validation currently for these fields.

With CEL rules, we could make checks which validate if the field is set either in spec.forProvider or spec.initProvider. We already have such rules, but only for top level parameters, as they were introduced with ObserveOnly. Now we should go into nested structs, which makes the path generation for CEL a bit tricky.
@lsviben lsviben mentioned this issue Jul 27, 2023
Merged
3 tasks
@lsviben lsviben mentioned this issue Aug 10, 2023
Closed
@lsviben lsviben mentioned this issue Sep 1, 2023
Closed
3 tasks
@lsviben
Copy link
Contributor Author

lsviben commented Sep 18, 2023

Closed the PR for now.

@lsviben lsviben closed this as completed Sep 18, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@lsviben lsviben

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

CEL rules extension lsviben/upjet
1 participant
@lsviben