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: remove deprecated flags for 3.0 #4770

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 9, 2023
Merged

Conversation

pmalek
Copy link
Member

@pmalek pmalek commented Oct 3, 2023

What this PR does / why we need it:

Remove previously deprecated flags for 3.0 release.

Which issue this PR fixes:

Special notes for your reviewer:

PR Readiness Checklist:

Complete these before marking the PR as ready to review:

  • the CHANGELOG.md release notes have been updated to reflect any significant (and particularly user-facing) changes introduced by this PR

@pmalek pmalek force-pushed the remove-deprecated-flags-for-3.0 branch from a9dbed4 to 5e0d575 Compare October 3, 2023 13:45
@pmalek pmalek self-assigned this Oct 3, 2023
@pull-request-size pull-request-size bot added size/M and removed size/S labels Oct 3, 2023
@pmalek pmalek added this to the KIC v3.0.0 milestone Oct 3, 2023
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 3, 2023

Codecov Report

All modified lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (81f1a20) 77.7% compared to head (5e0d575) 77.7%.
Report is 8 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##            main   #4770   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage   77.7%   77.7%           
=====================================
  Files        163     163           
  Lines      18541   18520   -21     
=====================================
- Hits       14409   14408    -1     
+ Misses      3321    3307   -14     
+ Partials     811     805    -6     
Files Coverage Δ
internal/manager/config.go 94.6% <ø> (-0.6%) ⬇️

... and 4 files with indirect coverage changes

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

@pmalek
Copy link
Member Author

pmalek commented Oct 3, 2023

For some reason the routes are not always in the same order in

assert.Equal(t, kong.Route{
Name: kong.String("default.foo.foo-svc.example.com.80"),
StripPath: kong.Bool(false),
RegexPriority: kong.Int(0),
ResponseBuffering: kong.Bool(true),
RequestBuffering: kong.Bool(true),
Hosts: kong.StringSlice("example.com"),
PreserveHost: kong.Bool(true),
Paths: kong.StringSlice("/"),
Protocols: kong.StringSlice("http", "https"),
ID: kong.String("99296cc1-ab30-59f8-b204-7b1a45e64cac"),
}, state.Services[0].Routes[0].Route)
assert.Equal(t, kong.Route{
Name: kong.String("default.foo.foo-svc._.example.com.80"),
StripPath: kong.Bool(false),
RegexPriority: kong.Int(0),
ResponseBuffering: kong.Bool(true),
RequestBuffering: kong.Bool(true),
Hosts: kong.StringSlice("*.example.com"),
SNIs: nil,
PreserveHost: kong.Bool(true),
Paths: kong.StringSlice("/"),
Protocols: kong.StringSlice("http", "https"),
ID: kong.String("cbdfe994-15d4-5336-909a-e302ed66e19a"),
}, state.Services[0].Routes[1].Route)

Should they be? 🤔

@pmalek
Copy link
Member Author

pmalek commented Oct 9, 2023

For some reason the routes are not always in the same order in

assert.Equal(t, kong.Route{
Name: kong.String("default.foo.foo-svc.example.com.80"),
StripPath: kong.Bool(false),
RegexPriority: kong.Int(0),
ResponseBuffering: kong.Bool(true),
RequestBuffering: kong.Bool(true),
Hosts: kong.StringSlice("example.com"),
PreserveHost: kong.Bool(true),
Paths: kong.StringSlice("/"),
Protocols: kong.StringSlice("http", "https"),
ID: kong.String("99296cc1-ab30-59f8-b204-7b1a45e64cac"),
}, state.Services[0].Routes[0].Route)
assert.Equal(t, kong.Route{
Name: kong.String("default.foo.foo-svc._.example.com.80"),
StripPath: kong.Bool(false),
RegexPriority: kong.Int(0),
ResponseBuffering: kong.Bool(true),
RequestBuffering: kong.Bool(true),
Hosts: kong.StringSlice("*.example.com"),
SNIs: nil,
PreserveHost: kong.Bool(true),
Paths: kong.StringSlice("/"),
Protocols: kong.StringSlice("http", "https"),
ID: kong.String("cbdfe994-15d4-5336-909a-e302ed66e19a"),
}, state.Services[0].Routes[1].Route)

Should they be? 🤔

That will be handled in #4777 (or #4781)

@pmalek pmalek marked this pull request as ready for review October 9, 2023 11:02
@pmalek pmalek requested a review from a team as a code owner October 9, 2023 11:02
@pmalek pmalek enabled auto-merge (squash) October 9, 2023 11:02
Copy link
Member

@programmer04 programmer04 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🧹

@pmalek pmalek merged commit 6a951b1 into main Oct 9, 2023
42 checks passed
@pmalek pmalek deleted the remove-deprecated-flags-for-3.0 branch October 9, 2023 11:45
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