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

lib/rest_openshift.rb self.populate update #85

Closed
xingxingxia opened this issue Feb 20, 2019 · 7 comments
Closed

lib/rest_openshift.rb self.populate update #85

xingxingxia opened this issue Feb 20, 2019 · 7 comments

Comments

@xingxingxia
Copy link
Contributor

In 4.0 env, due to https://jira.coreos.com/browse/MSTR-306, Given I have a project fails with:

error getting self from api: {"kind":"Status","apiVersion":"v1","metadata":{},"status":"Failure","message":"Unauthorized","reason":"Unauthorized","code":401}

Apply below diff, Given I have a project then passes.

       def self.populate(path, base_opts, opts)
-        populate_common("/oapi/<oapi_version>", path, base_opts, opts)
+        populate_common("/apis/user.openshift.io/<oapi_version>", path, base_opts, opts)
       end

Need update it considering 3.x compatibility
@akostadinov @pruan-rht could you help?
CC @zhouying7780 @wjiangjay @zihantang-rh

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Feb 20, 2019

why not create a PR for this?
or just want to make sure how to deal with this kind of issue?

I think it's not work with whole 3.x, since afaik separated apigroup is added in later 3.x.

@pruan-rht
Copy link
Member

#84

@pruan-rht
Copy link
Member

@xingxingxia @wjiangjay @akostadinov coincidentally, I filed this PR #84 today.

@pruan-rht
Copy link
Member

FYI /oapi was removed about a month ago: openshift/origin#21782 . Also, I've tested the new path it works up until 3.6, before which we have to use the /oapi path

@xingxingxia
Copy link
Contributor Author

xingxingxia commented Feb 20, 2019

Thank all.

why not create a PR for this?

I didn't think out solution to be compatible with all 3.x versions.
Closing, now that #84 opened

@akostadinov
Copy link
Contributor

are you using token users to hit this issue btw? Better use user:pass pairs anyway.

@xingxingxia
Copy link
Contributor Author

No, I was just using user:pass

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants