Introduce APEOverride
for Bearer
-token #225
No reviewers
Labels
No labels
P0
P1
P2
P3
good first issue
pool
Infrastructure
blocked
bug
config
discussion
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
go
help wanted
internal
invalid
kludge
observability
perfomance
question
refactoring
wontfix
No milestone
No project
No assignees
4 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: TrueCloudLab/frostfs-sdk-go#225
Loading…
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "aarifullin/frostfs-sdk-go:feat/beartoken_ape"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
apemanager
methods.apemanager
toape
APEOverride
forBearer
-tokenecf35f020f
toef886376f6
ef886376f6
toe28536b81b
e28536b81b
to0082f1f132
0082f1f132
tob08e5ad989
@ -84,0 +139,4 @@
}
for i := range lhs.GetChains() {
if !reflect.DeepEqual(lhs.GetChains()[i], rhs.GetChains()[i]) {
If we already use deep equal, why not use it on
lhs
andrhs
?Sorry, this is the flavor of the previous implementation. Fixed
b08e5ad989
to4f5bad8367
@ -39,0 +106,4 @@
apeOverride.SetTarget(c.Target.ToV2())
chains := make([]*apeV2.Chain, len(c.Chains))
for i := range c.Chains {
chains[i] = new(apeV2.Chain)
It seems this is unnecessary because of the next line
True. Fixed
@ -72,6 +151,16 @@ func (b *Token) readFromV2(m acl.BearerToken, checkFieldPresence bool) error {
return errors.New("missing token lifetime")
}
b.apeOverride = nil
Why do we need this?
If we want make sure there is not old data then probably we need the same for other fields. Currently this isn't fully consistent I suppose
Okay, I remate in old manner with flag and made consistent with other fields
@ -217,0 +314,4 @@
b.apeOverride = v
}
func (b *Token) APEOverride() *APEOverride {
Do we need comment for this method?
Added
4f5bad8367
to7596f110da