Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
✨ policy exceptions v2 #943
✨ policy exceptions v2 #943
Changes from all commits
65aca37
8af8a25
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
Large diffs are not rendered by default.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't understand why we need to change the impact for a job that already exists... I think this shouldn't be the case. If we really want to change it, then we should be calling
modifyCheckJob
instead ofaddCheckJob
but I am not sureThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good catch! There is a problem that we never fully explored that you are really exposing here:
What if a check is deactivate, and later re-activate?
ie: it is first added (action=unspecified/activate)
then it is deactivated (action=deactivate)
and then another top-level policy comes and wants to actually set it on AND/OR make a modification. We have assumed - so far - that the action for activate and the action for modify are almost interchangeable. However, now that the impact is getting modified, it can lead to some nasty side-effects. This happens because if we ignore a check, the impact is set to
impact.Scoring = explorer.ScoringSystem_IGNORE_SCORE
. So any call later on that modifies this overwrites the impact's scoring system.Let's solve this step by step.
And the first step is where I think you are spot on: let's remove this line and keep it only for explicit modifications.
Next, I think we should (1) remove the really outdated
Action
field from impact (it should only be used for v7 compatibility, otherwise all actions are bound to the mquery) and (2) review the action field, because it is overloaded right now.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
added #949 and #950 for the follow ups. Also added automated tests for the cases used to validate whether exceptions work as expected
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.