Repository navigation
feat(clover): add cloudformationonly prop to cloudformation aws assets - #8283
Conversation
Dependency Review✅ No vulnerabilities or OpenSSF Scorecard issues found.Scanned FilesNone |
c14592b to
6403fe8
Compare
|
Working with Module Index at: https://module-index.systeminit.com AWS - 0 new, 203 changed asset(s) |
|
/diff AWS::SNS::TopicPolicy |
|
Working with Module Index at: https://module-index.systeminit.com Diffed AWS::SNS::TopicPolicy with the module index:Added function Set attributes for building assets in CloudFormation:Added prop /root/domain/extra/CloudFormationOnly:Replaced value within leafFunctions binding:Removed leafFunctions binding |
| const [variant] = schema.variants; | ||
|
|
||
| if (!spec.name.includes("::") || variant.superSchema.handlers) { | ||
| if (!spec.name.includes("::") || variant.superSchema.handlers?.read) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not sure about this. Why should we change this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It adds the prop to the assets that aren't supported by cloudcontrol and also lack the read 'handler' - so if I remove this part, the prop isn't added to 5 assets. If we don't want this I could add overrides to those 5 assets instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we had this way originally as no handlers meant no support, but I suppose read only could mean the same thing
I guess we've always had these wrong then?
This PR:
CloudFormationOnlyboolean prop todomain/extrafor 202 AWS assets that lack CloudControl supportdefaultValue: "true"andhidden: trueso it doesn't appear in the UIScreenshots:
CloudFormation asset:

CloudControl asset:

How was it tested?
Does it require a docs change?
In short: 🔗