fix: handle changed Juju secret owner content behaviour#132
Open
tonyandrewmeyer wants to merge 4 commits intocanonical:mainfrom
Open
fix: handle changed Juju secret owner content behaviour#132tonyandrewmeyer wants to merge 4 commits intocanonical:mainfrom
tonyandrewmeyer wants to merge 4 commits intocanonical:mainfrom
Conversation
…lly refresh to the latest revision of secrets.
Author
|
From what I can tell, the pyright failures are not introduced in this branch, but if they are please let me know and I can dig into what's happening there. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
As of Juju 3.1.7 (and 3.3.1, and all versions from 3.4.0 onwards) the behaviour of accessing secret content in Juju has changed:
This change breaks the
data_secretslibrary, because it gets the secret content (e.g. to add a new key:value) and that will now be the current revision, so will not have any local changes. In practice, this means thatdata_secretscan no longer add multiple secrets because when the second one is added, it's added to the revision that didn't have the first one.The secret owner is able to use
peekin both 3.1.6 and 3.1.7, so the safe change is to always use peek - this is required in 3.1.7, and has no effect in 3.1.6.