Project

General

Profile

Actions
Copy link

Bug #3433

closed

Missing node id should be ignored for variable resolution in deployment

Added by François ARMAND over 11 years ago. Updated about 11 years ago.

Status:
Rejected
Priority:
N/A
Assignee:
Nicolas CHARLES
Category:
Web - Config management
Target version:
2.6.6
Pull Request:
Severity:
UX impact:
User visibility:
Effort required:
Priority:
Name check:
Fix check:
Regression:

Description

We can use variable in directive, like ${rudder.node.id} and the like.

When we are looking-up a variable of type target (i.e: ${rudder.some_rule_id.target.id}, and that one of the target can not be resolve, it should not block the deployment.
Typically, in internal Directive commons, ${rudder.haspolicyserver-root.target.hostname} should be resolve for available nodes.

Actions
Copy link
 #1

Updated by François ARMAND over 11 years ago

  • Status changed from Discussion to Pending technical review
  • Assignee changed from François ARMAND to Nicolas CHARLES
Actions
Copy link
 #2

Updated by Nicolas PERRON over 11 years ago

  • Target version changed from 2.5.2 to 2.5.3
Actions
Copy link
 #3

Updated by Nicolas CHARLES over 11 years ago

I am really not convinced by this change.
Indeed, if a value that is expected is not there, it's probably better to fail rather than continue and generate promises that can be invalid.

Actions
Copy link
 #4

Updated by Nicolas CHARLES over 11 years ago

  • Status changed from Pending technical review to Discussion
  • Assignee changed from Nicolas CHARLES to François ARMAND
Actions
Copy link
 #5

Updated by Nicolas PERRON over 11 years ago

  • Target version changed from 2.5.3 to 2.5.4
Actions
Copy link
 #6

Updated by Nicolas PERRON over 11 years ago

  • Target version changed from 2.5.4 to 2.5.5
Actions
Copy link
 #7

Updated by Nicolas PERRON over 11 years ago

  • Target version changed from 2.5.5 to 2.5.6
Actions
Copy link
 #8

Updated by Nicolas PERRON about 11 years ago

  • Target version changed from 2.5.6 to 2.6.4

What is the state of this bug ? is the issue true today ?

Actions
Copy link
 #9

Updated by Nicolas PERRON about 11 years ago

  • Target version changed from 2.6.4 to 2.6.5
Actions
Copy link
 #10

Updated by Nicolas PERRON about 11 years ago

  • Target version changed from 2.6.5 to 2.6.6
Actions
Copy link
 #11

Updated by François ARMAND about 11 years ago

  • Assignee changed from François ARMAND to Nicolas CHARLES

Nic: could you post your comment on the pull request, then close it, then close that one as invalid? Thanks!

Actions
Copy link
 #12

Updated by Nicolas CHARLES about 11 years ago

  • Status changed from Discussion to Rejected

I'm rejecting this ticket; I can be convinced by having the generation of promises of invalid nodes skipped, but clearly node generating everything with the risk of invalid value

Actions
Copy link

Also available in: Atom PDF