Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[KeyVault Keys] Fixed the rollup warnings #11549

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Oct 12, 2020

Conversation

sadasant
Copy link
Contributor

@sadasant sadasant commented Sep 29, 2020

Context: I did most of this while writing instructions for others. It made sense to me to make the pull request instead of putting more effort in the instructions.

Fixes #9867

This PR:

  • Copies the files using Node-specific features into files with the same name but ending in .browser.
  • Cleans up any Node-specific references from the new .browser files.
  • Maps these files in the package.json
  • Removes the unnecessary content from the rollup.base.config.js
  • Ensures things build correctly. No rollup warnings, no lint issues, etc.
  • Ensures tests pass.

It's my first time doing the .browser stuff, so
Feedback appreciated ✨

@sadasant
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasant commented Oct 2, 2020

@ramya-rao-a After having the time to read this again, I realized I did a very poor job of moving the algorithms.ts file! These new changes I'm working on will make a lot more sense! Thank you for your patience.

/**
* A plain object containing all of the locally supported algorithms.
*/
export const localSupportedAlgorithms: LocalSupportedAlgorithmsRecord = {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we keep the current types as is, this contraption is necessary. As soon as we get into browser support, this will expand and be coherent.

@@ -80,77 +74,6 @@ const pipeAssertions = (...assertions: LocalAssertion[]): LocalAssertion => (...
}
};

/**
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

These types were moved to localCryptography/models.ts.

@@ -1,4 +1,98 @@
// Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation.
// Licensed under the MIT license.

import { JsonWebKey } from "../keysModels";
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

These types were just moved out of the algorithms.ts file.

* The list of known assertions so far.
* Assertions verify that the requirements to execute a local cryptography operation are met.
*/
export const assertions: Record<string, LocalAssertion> = {};
Copy link
Contributor

@ramya-rao-a ramya-rao-a Oct 4, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please note, the below feedback is not a blocker for this PR, but we should look into this nevertheless and do any follow ups in a separate PR.

I was trying to figure out whey we need to export these assertions. We use these assertions only in the validate method in each algorithm. Since we dont have any algorithm in browser, this got me thinking as to why we even need it which then lead me to the tests in the file localCryptography.spect.ts file. So, a few questions:

  • When we run the tests in the file localCryptography.spect.ts in CI in the browser, what is assertions pointing to? If it is the assertions in the algorithms.ts file, then we are essentially not getting the coverage for "browser code". If it is the assertions in the algorithms.browser.ts file, then tests would fail because assertions is an empty object as seen above. This delves into a generic question around how do we expect our tests to work when the code is split between node and browser like how are are doing in this PR and how we have done in many other places
  • Looking at the tests themselves, it felt a little odd to me that we were testing assertions. Shouldnt we be testing that the right assertions are added to the alogrithms i.e. Wouldnt we get a more appropriate coverage by calling validate() on the different algorithms and checking if the expected error was thrown?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I like those ideas! After this release, I'll go back to this PR and make issues based on your feedback. Thank you 🌞

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We don't currently run cryptography tests on the browser. I can take your validate feedback and work with it on a separate issue! Here's the issue: #11779

Copy link
Contributor

@ramya-rao-a ramya-rao-a left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good. Please look at #11549 (comment)

@ramya-rao-a
Copy link
Contributor

/azp run js - keyvault-keys - tests

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@sadasant sadasant merged commit 4cf3b9c into Azure:master Oct 12, 2020
@sadasant sadasant deleted the keyvault-keys/9867 branch October 12, 2020 17:30
@sadasant
Copy link
Contributor Author

Merged since it was approved, we just released and to avoid this PR from getting stale.

openapi-sdkautomation bot pushed a commit to AzureSDKAutomation/azure-sdk-for-js that referenced this pull request Dec 30, 2020
Api Management - make /tenant endpoints ARM compliant in 2020-06-01-preview version (Azure#11549)

* Adds base for updating Microsoft.ApiManagement from version stable/2019-12-01 to version 2020-06-01-preview

* Updates readme

* Updates API version in new specs and examples

* Add support in API Management for Availability Zones (Azure#10284)

* apim in azs

* fix prettier check

* PATCH should return 200 OK (Azure#10328)

* add support for PATCH returning 200 OK

* CI fixes

prettier fix

CI fixes part 2

* Password no longer a mandatory property when uploading Certificates

* add missing x-ms-odata extension for filter support

* +gatewayhostnameconfiguration protocol changes (Azure#10292)

* [2020-06-01-preview] Update Oauth Server secrets Contract (Azure#10602)

* Oauth server secrets contract

* fix azureMonitor enum

* API Management Service Deleted Services Resource (Azure#10607)

* API Management Service Deleted Services Resource

* Path fix

* Lint + custom-words fixes

* Location URI parameter for deletedservices Resource

* GET for deletedservices by service name

* Remove resourceGroupName from resource path

* fixes

* schema for purge operation

* perttier applied

* 204 response code added

Co-authored-by: REDMOND\glfeokti <glfeokti@microsoft.com>

* OperationNameFormat property added to Diagnostic contract (Azure#10641)

* OperationNameFormat property added to Diagnostic contract

* add azuremonitor to update contract

Co-authored-by: REDMOND\glfeokti <glfeokti@microsoft.com>

* [Microsoft.ApiManagement][2020-06-01-preview] Change Network Status response contract (Azure#10331)

* Change Network Status response contract

* Update examples for network status contract

* ApiManagement - tenant/settings endpoints

* ApiManagement - tenant/settings endpoints fix

* ApiManagement - tenant/settings endpoints fix prettier

* ApiManagement - tenant/settings endpoints fix 3

* ApiManagement - tenant/settings endpoints fix 4

* ApiManagement - tenant/settings endpoints fix 5

Co-authored-by: Samir Solanki <samirsolanki@outlook.com>
Co-authored-by: maksimkim <maksim.kim@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: promoisha <feoktistovgg@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: REDMOND\glfeokti <glfeokti@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: RupengLiu <rliu1211@terpmail.umd.edu>
Co-authored-by: vfedonkin <vifedo@microsoft.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[KeyVault Keys] Roll up warnings for browser
2 participants