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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
feat: Add support for GitHub Actions OIDC via oidc_request_url and oidc_request_token fields #421
feat: Add support for GitHub Actions OIDC via oidc_request_url and oidc_request_token fields #421
Changes from 6 commits
9a63f91
bd337c9
1c97a49
af64f33
7afd73e
b1d6ef9
90c5c1e
d171d2a
8c0249c
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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 wonder, why aren't we using the
azure_client_set.go
'sNew
function for this? It seems those options are reified in this placeThere 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.
azure_client_set is only used by chroot, each builder needs to pass the options into the AuthOptions block
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.
This is slightly confusing given the fact that it was created in the common package, I imagine the idea was to eventually migrate to that but I kind of like having the clients separate personally
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 guess given both builders are using the same SDK, if the code is the same, might as well use the common implementation. Or if there's a good reason to keep them separate, drop the common one as it's not used
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.
That makes sense to me, like we talked about off GitHub I'll follow up with this change on another PR, thanks for this suggestion, we'll unify everything to use the common azure client
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.