fix: sanitise schedule expression in GuScheduledLambda construct IDs#2849
Draft
jorgeazevedo wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
Draft
fix: sanitise schedule expression in GuScheduledLambda construct IDs#2849jorgeazevedo wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
jorgeazevedo wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
Conversation
|
095fc02 to
a475072
Compare
Schedule expressions like cron(* * * * ? *) contain characters that produce unstable CloudFormation logical IDs. Strip non-alphanumeric characters from the expression before using it in the construct ID.
a475072 to
875d963
Compare
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
What does this change?
Sanitises schedule expression strings (e.g.
cron(* * * * ? *)) inGuScheduledLambdaconstruct IDs by stripping non-alphanumeric characters, preventing unstable CloudFormation logical IDs that caused phantom changesets on every deployment.How has this change been tested?
Have we considered potential risks?