-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.2k
CloudFormation v2 Engine: V1 Test Porting and Annotations and Batch of Parity Improvements #12660
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
8f14387
base support for dependson and apigw test unlock
MEPalma 2bfc135
base support for fn sub
MEPalma 648fcf1
Merge branch 'master' into MEP-CFN-fn_sub
MEPalma 66937e0
v1 tests port, test annotations, batch of parity improvements
MEPalma c90d807
cleanup
MEPalma 643d3a0
annotation
MEPalma 71305fa
conflicts
MEPalma 168eef2
revert
MEPalma bd336d9
revert
MEPalma File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Empty file.
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
I feel the order of changes in the output gives us clues into the implementation on the AWS side. If we have a difference then perhaps our visiting order needs adjusting instead?
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.
From what I’ve observed, AWS returns changes in the same order as they are declared in the template.
Our implementation currently mirrors this behavior (it is also true that the json library preserving key order after 3.7, but this is not the only reason for our compliance here), except in cases where the user doesn’t explicitly sort dependencies in the template. In those situations, our system places the dependee’s resource change first (if a change exists there), though it otherwise respects the original order of the template for all other changes.
I’ve decided to omit these specifics for now, but it’s unfortunate that the snapshot is being influenced by the normalization process.
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.
Can we either add a skipped test that exercises this behaviour or at least a TODO comment in the
describe_change_set
provider method to come back to in the future? I agree it's not critical for parity at this stage, but it is still a discrepancy.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.
Yes absolutely, I'm adding this TODO in the PR for Fn::Split, after I merge this train of PRs today