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

feat(certificate): allow retrying managed certificate issuance #847

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 26, 2024

Conversation

phm07
Copy link
Contributor

@phm07 phm07 commented Aug 19, 2024

Somehow this API call didn't have a corresponding command in the CLI, so this PR adds it.

@phm07 phm07 added the feature label Aug 19, 2024
@phm07 phm07 self-assigned this Aug 19, 2024
@phm07 phm07 requested a review from a team as a code owner August 19, 2024 15:16
@phm07
Copy link
Contributor Author

phm07 commented Aug 19, 2024

It is debatable whether retry or retry-issuance is a better name for the command. retry-issuance is more precise, but also very cumbersome to use. Although it probably won't be used much anyway, since this feature was missing for 3 years and nobody noticed.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 19, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 59.09091% with 9 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 61.42%. Comparing base (f7c9ac6) to head (0ea1d73).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
internal/cmd/certificate/retry.go 61.90% 4 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
internal/cmd/certificate/certificate.go 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #847      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   61.43%   61.42%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         237      238       +1     
  Lines        8494     8516      +22     
==========================================
+ Hits         5218     5231      +13     
- Misses       2567     2572       +5     
- Partials      709      713       +4     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

var RetryCmd = base.Cmd{
BaseCobraCommand: func(client hcapi2.Client) *cobra.Command {
return &cobra.Command{
Use: "retry <certificate>",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It is debatable whether retry or retry-issuance is a better name for the command. retry-issuance is more precise, but also very cumbersome to use. Although it probably won't be used much anyway, since this feature was missing for 3 years and nobody noticed.

Its called retry in the API and RetryIssuance in Go, so we are not consistent any way.

I lean towards retry to be consistent with the API.

@phm07 phm07 merged commit 0223f7d into main Aug 26, 2024
5 checks passed
@phm07 phm07 deleted the certificate-retry branch August 26, 2024 08:01
phm07 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 30, 2024
🤖 I have created a release *beep* *boop*
---


##
[1.47.0](v1.46.0...v1.47.0)
(2024-08-30)


### Features

* allow deleting rDNS entries
([#839](#839))
([129f51d](129f51d)),
closes [#814](#814)
* **certificate:** allow retrying managed certificate issuance
([#847](#847))
([0223f7d](0223f7d))
* improve datacenter describe server types readability
([#854](#854))
([fc0002c](fc0002c)),
closes [#852](#852)


### Bug Fixes

* `quiet` option sometimes only working as a flag
([#846](#846))
([f7c9ac6](f7c9ac6))
* **image:** only accept numerical ids for update, delete, label
([#844](#844))
([7355571](7355571))
* **load-balancer:** show message if none of --server, --label-selector
or --ip is set ([#849](#849))
([2df45e0](2df45e0))
* **primary-ip:** change protection commands do not allow protection
levels ([#851](#851))
([697a87a](697a87a))

---
This PR was generated with [Release
Please](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please). See
[documentation](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please#release-please).
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants