ref!: Allow existing bearer token to be passed to dockerhub #138
Conversation
This file contains 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
technicallyjosh
changed the title
crazy-max
reviewed
Jul 22, 2023
technicallyjosh
changed the title
crazy-max
requested changes
Aug 8, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some changes looks unrelated like changes in buildx and docker dirs. Can we keep a minimal scope of changes with just the ability to reuse an existing token and do refactor in follow-up please?
Also having a commit message following our history like this would be nice:
dockerhub: ability to reuse existing token
This is because we have many things in this toolkit and it will be easier to look through the history if we want to bisect in the future.
Comment on lines
+178
to
+193
| export function validateRepoParts(val: RepoParts) { | ||
| val = val ?? { | ||
| namespace: '', | ||
| name: '' | ||
| }; | ||
| val.namespace = val.namespace ?? ''; | ||
| val.name = val.name ?? ''; | ||
|
|
||
| if (val.namespace.trim() == '') { | ||
| throw new Error('req.namespace is required'); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private static async handleResponse(resp: httpm.HttpClientResponse): Promise<string> { | ||
| const body = await resp.readBody(); | ||
| resp.message.statusCode = resp.message.statusCode || HttpCodes.InternalServerError; | ||
| if (resp.message.statusCode < 200 || resp.message.statusCode >= 300) { | ||
| if (resp.message.statusCode == HttpCodes.Unauthorized) { | ||
| throw new Error(`Docker Hub API: operation not permitted`); | ||
| } | ||
| const errResp = <Record<string, string>>JSON.parse(body); | ||
| for (const k of ['message', 'detail', 'error']) { | ||
| if (errResp[k]) { | ||
| throw new Error(`Docker Hub API: bad status code ${resp.message.statusCode}: ${errResp[k]}`); | ||
| } | ||
| if (val.name.trim() == '') { | ||
| throw new Error('req.name is required'); | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it really necessary? I would prefer this to be handled server side and I think this is already the case no?
Comment on lines
+195
to
+215
| async function handleResponse<T>(response: HttpClientResponse): Promise<T> { | ||
| const body = await response.readBody(); | ||
|
|
||
| // Default the status code to internal. | ||
| const statusCode = response.message.statusCode ?? HttpCodes.InternalServerError; | ||
|
|
||
| if (statusCode < 200 || statusCode >= 400) { | ||
| const errResp = JSON.parse(body) as Record<string, string>; | ||
|
|
||
| for (const k of ['message', 'detail', 'error']) { | ||
| // We have a couple different props that can come back. Check the known | ||
| // ones. | ||
| if (errResp[k]) { | ||
| throw new Error(`docker api request failed: ${statusCode} ${errResp[k]}`); | ||
| } | ||
| throw new Error(`Docker Hub API: bad status code ${resp.message.statusCode}`); | ||
| } | ||
| return body; | ||
|
|
||
| throw new Error(`docker api request failed: ${statusCode} ${body}`); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return JSON.parse(body) as T; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does not seem there are any functional changes?
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| async function handleResponse<T>(response: HttpClientResponse): Promise<T> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do we need to change the scope?
| name: string; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| export function validateRepoParts(val: RepoParts) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should avoid exposing methods not intended to be consumed.
| const tokenResp = <TokenResponse>JSON.parse(await DockerHub.handleResponse(resp)); | ||
| core.setSecret(`${tokenResp.token}`); | ||
| return `${tokenResp.token}`; | ||
| export interface RepoParts { |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
This is a less than ideal behavior against our APIs and would probably hit rate limits quickly depending on the image queried.
This is really just some simple improvements to the existing functionality.