feat: support return the manager api's git hash and version #1408
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1408 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 45.15% 45.20% +0.05%
==========================================
Files 35 37 +2
Lines 2516 2524 +8
==========================================
+ Hits 1136 1141 +5
- Misses 1215 1218 +3
Partials 165 165
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
starsz
changed the title
starsz
changed the title
|
@starsz try to sync with the latest codes from the master branch? |
It's already the latest. Please see the CI on the master branch. |
|
fine, then please request changes from other members, once the FE test is fixed, I will let you know. |
|
FE is working on why test failed, once test fixed, we will merge. |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (h *Handler) ApplyRoute(r *gin.Engine) { | ||
| r.GET("/version", wgin.Wraps(h.Version)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This will lead to 2 kinds of APIs:
/apisix/admin/xxx/version
When we deprecate admin-api in V3, we will have to omit that prefix apisix/admin either, to have ManagerAPIs.
Now FE meets one issue: because HTTP call is handled by UmiJS, which only supports one prefix, /apisix/admin or /, then FE has to make hack codes to be compatible with those 2 kinds of APIs.
I know it's wired to have something like /apisix/admin/version, but could we add a prefix for this API first? with some description about this hacking case. In V3, we may omit that prefix from all APIs.
cc @LiteSun
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK.Got it.
I will add the prefix and ignore this API's auth checking in the next PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure if we need to omit the prefix, but unification is appropriate.
Please answer these questions before submitting a pull request
Why submit this pull request?
[] Bugfix
New feature provided
Improve performance
Backport patches
Related issues
fix #1404
New feature or improvement
Add
infoAPI to support get the backend info.