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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Restoring snoozeEndTime to AlertAttributesExcludedFromAAD #135602
Restoring snoozeEndTime to AlertAttributesExcludedFromAAD #135602
Changes from 1 commit
dc06a8b
4348163
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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 test doesn't seem to be working.
I commented out the return of the
snoozeEndTime
field in theAlertAttributesExcludedFromAAD
variable and this test is still passing - it should be failing.I know there's more work to be done by @mikecote today, so this might be a known issue, but I wanted to flag just in case.
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, this is because the migration will succeed even if decryption fails. I left a comment that we should add an expect here to ensure the api key still exists after migration but that can't be done until this (loading the test data in the correct manner)
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.
Brilliant, thanks, I'll work with Mike to get that sorted asap.
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.
Ideally, we should add
expect(response.body._source?.alert?.apiKey).not.to.be(undefined);
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 think there is a correct-er way to generate this data so that the api key can be decrypted by the functional test server. This is just one I've copied from local data and it gives a decryption error during the test :(
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.
Why is this necessary here? Am I missing something?
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.
Any field that's inside a document in
data.json
needs to have a mapping defined. It just so happened that none of the other rule SO examples indata.json
hadnotifyWhen
but the SO I just added does, so I added the mapping. It's not strictly needed for this PR, I could remove it from the new doc I added todata.json
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.
ahhh gotcha.
Thanks Ying.... enjoy the weekend! ;)