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

Update SimpleHttpOperator to take auth type object #15605

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 10, 2021

Conversation

fredthomsen
Copy link
Contributor

@fredthomsen fredthomsen commented Apr 30, 2021

A requests.auth.AuthBase object is not passed through from the
SimpleHttpOperator to the underlying HttpHook, thus if you want to
use the SimpleHttpOperator but have a custom auth_type, you must
inherit from it and override the execute method. Update the operator
to take this parameter.

Seems like a small oversight that existing tests should cover.

@boring-cyborg
Copy link

boring-cyborg bot commented Apr 30, 2021

Congratulations on your first Pull Request and welcome to the Apache Airflow community! If you have any issues or are unsure about any anything please check our Contribution Guide (https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.rst)
Here are some useful points:

  • Pay attention to the quality of your code (flake8, pylint and type annotations). Our pre-commits will help you with that.
  • In case of a new feature add useful documentation (in docstrings or in docs/ directory). Adding a new operator? Check this short guide Consider adding an example DAG that shows how users should use it.
  • Consider using Breeze environment for testing locally, it’s a heavy docker but it ships with a working Airflow and a lot of integrations.
  • Be patient and persistent. It might take some time to get a review or get the final approval from Committers.
  • Please follow ASF Code of Conduct for all communication including (but not limited to) comments on Pull Requests, Mailing list and Slack.
  • Be sure to read the Airflow Coding style.
    Apache Airflow is a community-driven project and together we are making it better 🚀.
    In case of doubts contact the developers at:
    Mailing List: [email protected]
    Slack: https://s.apache.org/airflow-slack

@fredthomsen
Copy link
Contributor Author

fredthomsen commented Apr 30, 2021

This does address issue #259, although given it's age, I doubt that is relevant now, which is why I did not include it above.

@fredthomsen fredthomsen force-pushed the HttpOperatorPassAuthTypeToHook branch 3 times, most recently from a40c27d to b389ac0 Compare May 2, 2021 13:51
@fredthomsen fredthomsen force-pushed the HttpOperatorPassAuthTypeToHook branch from b389ac0 to fa945d1 Compare May 6, 2021 14:10
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 7, 2021

The PR is likely OK to be merged with just subset of tests for default Python and Database versions without running the full matrix of tests, because it does not modify the core of Airflow. If the committers decide that the full tests matrix is needed, they will add the label 'full tests needed'. Then you should rebase to the latest master or amend the last commit of the PR, and push it with --force-with-lease.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the okay to merge It's ok to merge this PR as it does not require more tests label May 7, 2021
@ashb
Copy link
Member

ashb commented May 7, 2021

@fredthomsen Could you rebase please?

@fredthomsen fredthomsen force-pushed the HttpOperatorPassAuthTypeToHook branch from fa945d1 to d808e71 Compare May 7, 2021 17:24
@fredthomsen
Copy link
Contributor Author

@fredthomsen Could you rebase please?

@ashb done.

@fredthomsen fredthomsen force-pushed the HttpOperatorPassAuthTypeToHook branch from d808e71 to ff6daf6 Compare May 9, 2021 00:35
A `requests.auth.AuthBase` object is not passed through from the
`SimpleHttpOperator` to the underlying `HttpHook`, thus if you want to
use the `SimpleHttpOperator` but have a custom auth_type, you must
inherit from it and override the execute method.  Update the operator
to take this parameter.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area:providers okay to merge It's ok to merge this PR as it does not require more tests
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants