Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

feat: Add gitops environments resource#170

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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Closed

Conversation

@ilia-medvedev-codefresh
Copy link
Contributor

What

Why

Notes

Checklist

@ilia-medvedev-codefresh
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

/test

@ilia-medvedev-codefresh
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

/test

@eti-codefresh
Copy link

i reviewed the platform side looks good to me

Copy link

@scme0scme0 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

Comment on lines +48 to +53
"server": {
Type: schema.TypeString,
Optional: true,
Description: "Target cluster server url. Defaults to `https://kubernetes.default.svc` which is the default in-cluster url",
Default: "https://kubernetes.default.svc",
},
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

server should always correspond to the server of ArgoCD cluster we put inname and we don't have any validation for it on the backend. Putting random address inserver can result in weird bug when in our UI we see that environment configured with cluster X, but inside it has apps from cluster Y.

What I think we should do is to remove "server" from graphql mutation input and derive it from the DB according to the provided cluster name. It should be easy change on backend side.

Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@denis-codefresh I agree. I did the implementation according to the current schema and it's a mandatory field

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account?Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@denis-codefreshdenis-codefreshdenis-codefresh left review comments

@eti-codefresheti-codefresheti-codefresh approved these changes

@scme0scme0scme0 approved these changes

@yaroslav-codefreshyaroslav-codefreshAwaiting requested review from yaroslav-codefreshyaroslav-codefresh is a code owner

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@ilia-medvedev-codefresh@eti-codefresh@denis-codefresh@scme0

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp