Skip to content

Update crossplane runtime to v2#139

Closed
ricCap wants to merge 1 commit intocrossplane-contrib:mainfrom
ricCap:update-crossplane-runtime-to-v2
Closed

Update crossplane runtime to v2#139
ricCap wants to merge 1 commit intocrossplane-contrib:mainfrom
ricCap:update-crossplane-runtime-to-v2

Conversation

@ricCap
Copy link
Contributor

@ricCap ricCap commented Oct 22, 2025

Description of your changes

This is a prerequisite for #128.

  • bump up the crossplane runtime to v2
  • use chainsaw for e2e tests
  • ⚠️ External Secret Store support is removed from ALL MRs (spec.publishConnectionDetailsTo is removed). This feature was alpha and it was decided to be removed from crossplane.
  • all other changes are backwards-compatible

This PR is inspired by upjet provider examples crossplane-contrib/provider-upjet-azure#1019

I have:

  • Read and followed Crossplane's contribution process.
  • Run make reviewable test to ensure this PR is ready for review.

How has this code been tested

- Update crossplane-runtime from v1.20.0 to v2.0.0
- Implement missing interface methods for crossplane-runtime v2 compatibility:
  - Add GetUsers/SetUsers for UserCounter interface on ProviderConfig
  - Add GetItems for ProviderConfigUsageList interface
  - Add SetResourceReference/GetResourceReference for ProviderConfigUsage
- Add compile-time interface validation with var _ assignments
- Fix JQ expression syntax in e2e test examples:
  - Remove problematic outer parentheses from URL expressions
  - Fix Authorization header secret injection syntax
- Add interface casting tests to prevent runtime panics
- Update go.mod and go.sum for crossplane-runtime v2 dependencies
- Use chainsaw for e2e tests

Signed-off-by: Riccardo Capraro <capraroriccardo@gmail.com>
Content-Type:
- application/json
Authorization:
- ("Bearer {{ auth:default:token }}")
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This syntax was causing issues in e2e tests. It seemed that because of the parenthesis this was trying to be interpreted as a jq expression. Could you please let me know if you think this is a regression (or if this was broken before as well)?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

E2e tests (running with chainsaw) are failing the same against main as well ricCap#4

@ricCap
Copy link
Contributor Author

ricCap commented Nov 17, 2025

Closing in favour of #147

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant