-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.2k
Cloudformation implement ssm param read #11962
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
Cloudformation implement ssm param read #11962
Conversation
@@ -264,6 +264,7 @@ class ServicePrincipal(str): | |||
""" | |||
|
|||
apigateway = "apigateway" | |||
cloudformation = "cloudformation" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is to be used with cloudcontrol. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/cloudcontrolapi/latest/userguide/resource-operations.html#resource-operations-permissions
SSMParameterProperties(Id=resource["Name"]) for resource in resources["Parameters"] | ||
SSMParameterProperties(Name=resource["Name"]) | ||
for resource in resources["Parameters"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Pive01 Will this create an issue with the resource overview? If so please let me know so that I don't break it for you! 😉
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually, I was just watching your demo and realised that the ssm parameter didn't show. So I realised that they are actually broken and this changes fixes it. We should probably try to push to merge this before the patch release!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @cloutierMat , it does indeed fix an issue as the identifier was not set correctly...now is properly discovered 🚀
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for spotting and addressing this so quickly @cloutierMat !
It also adds some pressure on a fairly old TODO item regarding an ASF-update-like CFn spec update automation 😁
Motivation
Implementation of
read
along with fixinglist
for ssm parameters. While fixing I realised that the generated specs were out of date. So I recreated them, highlighting an issue with the previous list operation.Changes
create
method to return theread
operation. (how can we test this?)read
operationlist
operation