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

[improve][admin] Align the auth and check it at the first place for topic related API #22342

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 1, 2024

Conversation

Technoboy-
Copy link
Contributor

Motivation

The main thing is to align the auth operation and put the auth checking operation at the first position.

Modifications

  • getPartitionedTopicMetadat, internalGetPropertiesAsync, internalUpdatePropertiesAsync , internalRemovePropertiesAsync, internalDeletePartitionedTopic, internalGetSubscriptions,
    internalGetStatsAsync, internalSkipMessages, internalSkipAllMessages, internalPeekNthMessageAsync, internalExamineMessageAsync, internalExpireMessagesByPosition, internalResetCursorAsync, internalResetCursorOnPosition, internalGetMessageById,
    internalExpireMessagesByTimestamp

And add related auth test.

Documentation

  • doc
  • doc-required
  • doc-not-needed
  • doc-complete

@Technoboy- Technoboy- self-assigned this Mar 25, 2024
@Technoboy- Technoboy- added this to the 3.3.0 milestone Mar 25, 2024
@Technoboy- Technoboy- added ready-to-test doc-not-needed Your PR changes do not impact docs labels Mar 25, 2024
@Technoboy- Technoboy- requested a review from coderzc March 27, 2024 07:46
@Technoboy- Technoboy- changed the title [improve][admin] Check the auth at the first place for topic related API [improve][admin] Align the auth and check it at the first place for topic related API Apr 1, 2024
@Technoboy- Technoboy- merged commit 50121e7 into apache:master Apr 1, 2024
52 of 56 checks passed
Technoboy- added a commit to Technoboy-/pulsar that referenced this pull request Apr 1, 2024
@lhotari
Copy link
Member

lhotari commented Apr 2, 2024

@Technoboy- I guess it makes sense to cherry-pick to 3.0.x and 3.2.x to reduce the chances of merge conflicts for future maintenance?

@RobertIndie
Copy link
Member

@Technoboy- I guess it makes sense to cherry-pick to 3.0.x and 3.2.x to reduce the chances of merge conflicts for future maintenance?

+1

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
doc-not-needed Your PR changes do not impact docs ready-to-test
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants