-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.9k
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
fix(cognito): getting user pool client secret creates unnecessary custom resource #28800
Conversation
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.
The pull request linter has failed. See the aws-cdk-automation comment below for failure reasons. If you believe this pull request should receive an exemption, please comment and provide a justification.
A comment requesting an exemption should contain the text Exemption Request
. Additionally, if clarification is needed add Clarification Request
to a comment.
9d55ae7
to
041f81e
Compare
041f81e
to
a7325ea
Compare
AWS CodeBuild CI Report
Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository |
Woo! Not sure why the integration testing didn't replace the hosted zone and domain correctly... I guess I'll try again. |
This PR has been in the CHANGES REQUESTED state for 3 weeks, and looks abandoned. To keep this PR from being closed, please continue work on it. If not, it will automatically be closed in a week. |
This PR has been deemed to be abandoned, and will be automatically closed. Please create a new PR for these changes if you think this decision has been made in error. |
The pull request linter fails with the following errors:
PRs must pass status checks before we can provide a meaningful review. If you would like to request an exemption from the status checks or clarification on feedback, please leave a comment on this PR containing |
This updates the
UserPoolClient
construct to not use a custom resource to fetch the secret. I thought about gating this behind a feature flag (and am still happy to do so) but this should functionally behave the same (the underlying value doesn't change, just the token) and it doesn't require any code changes for end users, it just removes a now-unneeded construct.Without
generateSecret: true
theClientSecret
attribute is not available so those checks are still retained (as are the related tests).The
ClientSecret
attribute seems to have been available in the resource schema for quite awhile but it isn't documented on the CloudFormation resource page.Closes #28785.
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license