fix (kubernetes-client) : Throw exception when HasMetadata is used in resources(...) API (#3990)

[rohanKanojia]

Description

Fix #3990

Access to resources(...) DSL method with generic HasMetadata interface
shouldn't be allowed.

Signed-off-by: Rohan Kumar rohaan@redhat.com

Type of change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• Feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change
• Chore (non-breaking change which doesn't affect codebase;
  test, version modification, documentation, etc.)

Checklist

• Code contributed by me aligns with current project license: Apache 2.0
• I Added CHANGELOG entry regarding this change
• I have implemented unit tests to cover my changes
• I have added/updated the javadocs and other documentation accordingly
• No new bugs, code smells, etc. in SonarCloud report
• I tested my code in Kubernetes
• I tested my code in OpenShift

[shawkins]

This was somewhat fixed by other upstream changes - you no longer get an npe, but an invalid url /api/v1/hasmetadatas

We could be doing a similar check for CustomResource or in general not allow any interface or abstract class. Generic is different in that it's a concrete class. It's hard in general for us to determine that a particular concrete class is invalid as a resource - the underlying logic is tolerant to both the group and version annotations being missing in which case the Config.getApiVersion is used.

[rohanKanojia]

I had pointed this out in #3990 (comment)

Shall I add an additional check to throw IllegalArgumentException in case any interface is provided in resources(..) method?

[shawkins]

Shall I add an additional check to throw IllegalArgumentException in case any interface is provided in resources(..) method?

Yes a check for interfaces or abstract would cover the HasMetadata case as well.

[manusa]

This was somewhat fixed by other upstream changes - you no longer get an npe, but an invalid url /api/v1/hasmetadatas

The fix should address the comment #3990 (comment)

which should mostly deal with UX. Users who perform such a call should get an explicit message stating that the operation is forbidden, and the suggested fix/alternative operation

[shawkins]

LGTM

[sonarcloud]

SonarCloud Quality Gate failed.   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

0.0% Coverage
0.0% Duplication