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(vcs-aggregated-checks): exposes VCS checks settings in the available VCS integrations #566

Merged

Conversation

silviutanasa
Copy link
Contributor

@silviutanasa silviutanasa commented Aug 29, 2024

Description of the change

New:
As part of the VCS Aggregated checks epic (https://app.clickup.com/t/8694knv2g), we added support, for the new "vcs_checks" option, to the existing VCS integrations from our terraform provider.
This change affects only the exiting supported VCS integrations terraform data and resources.
Feature demo: https://www.loom.com/share/4f1fad2530b846aa8d56d6b1d8151990

Improvements:
Because the "SPACELIFT_API_KEY_ENDPOINT" config key was using a Github secret, and because we don't consider it to be a sensitive value, for simplicity, we defined it in the infra repo and used it directly.

Caveats:
The VCS Aggregated checks is under a Feature flag, so exposing this option in the provider can cause issues to the clients that want to use it, but don't have the Feature flag enabled.

Type of change

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change that adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • Documentation (non-breaking change that adds documentation)

Checklists

Development

  • Lint rules pass locally
  • The code changed/added as part of this pull request has been covered with tests
  • All tests related to the changed code pass in development
  • Examples for new resources and data sources have been added
  • Default values have been documented in the description (e.g., "Dummy: (Boolean) Blah blah. Defaults to false.)
  • If the action fails that checks the documentation: Run go generate to make sure the docs are up to date

Code review

  • This pull request has a descriptive title and information useful to a reviewer. There may be a screenshot or screencast attached
  • Pull Request is no longer marked as "draft"
  • Reviewers have been assigned
  • Changes have been reviewed by at least one other engineer

@silviutanasa silviutanasa force-pushed the cu-8695g4h7c-expose-vcs-checks-setting-in-tf-provider branch from e805470 to 737c572 Compare August 29, 2024 14:15
@silviutanasa silviutanasa self-assigned this Aug 29, 2024
@silviutanasa silviutanasa force-pushed the cu-8695g4h7c-expose-vcs-checks-setting-in-tf-provider branch 5 times, most recently from d2ddd91 to c2e4f28 Compare August 30, 2024 07:44
@silviutanasa silviutanasa force-pushed the cu-8695g4h7c-expose-vcs-checks-setting-in-tf-provider branch 6 times, most recently from 28b84d7 to b619568 Compare August 30, 2024 10:01
@silviutanasa silviutanasa force-pushed the cu-8695g4h7c-expose-vcs-checks-setting-in-tf-provider branch from b619568 to 5399f64 Compare August 30, 2024 11:04
@silviutanasa silviutanasa requested a review from mbialon September 2, 2024 05:57
@silviutanasa silviutanasa marked this pull request as ready for review September 2, 2024 05:57
@silviutanasa silviutanasa changed the title feat(vcs-aggregated-checks): exposes VCS checks settings in Gitlab VC… feat(vcs-aggregated-checks): exposes VCS checks settings in the available VCS integrations Sep 2, 2024
mbialon
mbialon previously approved these changes Sep 2, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@mbialon mbialon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

spacelift/resource_gitlab_integration_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@silviutanasa silviutanasa merged commit 3d7ceb4 into main Sep 3, 2024
7 checks passed
@silviutanasa silviutanasa deleted the cu-8695g4h7c-expose-vcs-checks-setting-in-tf-provider branch September 3, 2024 12:13
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.

2 participants