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

chore: feedback for @maurafortino 's #587 PR #591

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 17, 2024

Conversation

denopink
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@denopink denopink self-assigned this Dec 16, 2024
@denopink denopink force-pushed the denopink/feat/feedback-for-webhook-v2-branch branch 2 times, most recently from 55e79a2 to b3a7a34 Compare December 16, 2024 19:47
@denopink denopink force-pushed the denopink/feat/feedback-for-webhook-v2-branch branch from b3a7a34 to 4ca4e17 Compare December 16, 2024 20:16
@denopink
Copy link
Contributor Author

Went over the code with marua on a slack call. We'll merge this either today or tomorrow morning.

case *ancla.RegistryV2:
if len(l.Registration.Kafkas) == 0 && len(l.Registration.Webhooks) == 0 {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

would it make sense to add this to the validation portion of web hook-schema? just thinking about ways to try and clean up the this switch statement

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, I think.

I suggest leaving it here until we successfully move it cleanly

}
if len(wh.ReceiverURLs) == 0 && len(wh.DNSSrvRecord.FQDNs) == 0 {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

same with this?

}

transport, err := NewSRVRecordDailer(wh.DNSSrvRecord)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I know it was already mentioned but just making a note so we remember to change this to NewSRVRecordDialer

}

if v2.client != nil {
resp, err = v2.client.Do(req)
} else {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

do we want this else statement? are we not trying to have retry logic for the custom client that we have?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah, that's exactly what I want to do. i.e.: use the retry client with a given dailer (the dailer may be custom or be default).

Either of us can do that. If you're busy, I can knock that out tomorrow morning.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

i should be able to work on this

return d.srvs[i].Priority < d.srvs[j].Priority
})
default:
return nil, fmt.Errorf("unknwon loadBalancingScheme type: %s", d.dnsSrvRecord.LoadBalancingScheme)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

spelling change: unknown

}
return nil

return nil, fmt.Errorf("unknow webhook registry type")
Copy link
Contributor

@maurafortino maurafortino Dec 17, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

spelling change: unknown

@denopink denopink merged commit c97f205 into webhook-v2 Dec 17, 2024
10 of 13 checks passed
@denopink denopink deleted the denopink/feat/feedback-for-webhook-v2-branch branch December 17, 2024 16:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants