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

Add operationID field to tap openapi response #4245

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 15, 2020

Conversation

kleimkuhler
Copy link
Contributor

This fixes an issue users are experiencing when upgrading from from Linkerd
2.6 to 2.7 and use the kubernetes-external-secrets project.

The change introduced by #3700 resulted in the tap service showing up in the
/openapi/v2 API response. I confirmed this with a local build.

A dependency within the project expects the operationID field to be present
in the swagger definition. It is optional as stated in the
spec. It's
purpose is to identify an operation and should be unique.

This change adds that field to tap service swagger spec. While this can be
fixed in the KES dependency, it certainly does not hurt to add and other
libraries may similarly expect this field.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Leimkuhler [email protected]

@kleimkuhler
Copy link
Contributor Author

#4209 asks for a different solution, but the issue that is being discussed on it is closed by this change. I don't know if we still need to worry about adding a /swaggerapi route to the tap service.

@@ -330,6 +330,7 @@ func mkPathItem(desc string) spec.PathItem {
},
},
},
ID: "tapResourceV0",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice fix @kleimkuhler

Small nit: I'd put this above Responses, just to make it a bit more readable, but TIOLI 👍

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

forgot to mention that this works for me locally :)

@kleimkuhler kleimkuhler merged commit b6aad75 into master Apr 15, 2020
@kleimkuhler kleimkuhler deleted the kleimkuhler/openapi-route branch April 15, 2020 16:41
@mycrEEpy
Copy link

Is there a chance to cherry pick this into a 2.7.2 release?

@linkerd linkerd deleted a comment from cpretzer Apr 15, 2020
@grampelberg
Copy link
Contributor

@mycrEEpy we're not planning on a 2.7.2 right now. Doing stable releases takes a ton of effort and we've reserved those for critical proxy bugs so far (avoiding backporting any control plane changes). Is there something blocking you from picking up tomorrow's edge? 2.8 will be out in ~4 weeks as well (don't quote me on that).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants