-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 39
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
Fixes #81 - wrong app var name for python expose #82
Conversation
h.RootPath = app.RootPath | ||
|
||
gwSpec := gatewaySpec{ | ||
FilePath: f.Path(), | ||
AppVarName: cap.ID, | ||
AppVarName: appVarName, |
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 think this is going to break the resource validation though. iirc, the resource validation is looking for a gateway with a given gateway ID as the name
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.
So that might have been why this became an issue, the name was changed to fix the resource validation issue but then caused a regression w/ proxy calls
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.
yeah same comment as below
h.RootPath = app.RootPath | ||
|
||
gwSpec := gatewaySpec{ | ||
FilePath: f.Path(), | ||
AppVarName: cap.ID, | ||
AppVarName: appVarName, |
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.
isnt this going to result in validation to fail again. On line 130 we call
gw := core.NewGateway(spec.AppVarName)
so then wont this not match our ID? other gatewayspecs have an id field so we can track it so i dont think this prevents the warning from popping up
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.
yeah, I just went back and added gatewayId
to the spec and updated this line to use that value.
|
Add extra dryrun level for tsc only
Fixes #81 by changing the
AppVarName
value set in the gateway spec back fromCapability.ID
to the name of the exported variable associated with the annotated FastAPI app.compiled output for
py-microservices
Output after change:Standard checks