-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8.3k
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
[Fleet] Improve package policy validation #125655
Comments
Pinging @elastic/fleet (Team:Fleet) |
Following up on this comment by @juliaElastic :
To clarify naming for packages different variables "levels" (I've seen some confusion around this):
The hierarchy for these variables is Is my understanding that the same variable (es AWS Is also my understanding that so far /cc @mtojek |
@endorama based on the open issue, it seems that input level variables are not yet supported on Fleet UI. Could you give an example on which package has this problem? I checked aws and some of the azure ones, but didn't see any On the issue raised on validation, the case was that global vars were moved to input level, and that seems to be supported in package spec. |
Not sure I'm following, no package use this because is not supported in Fleet. I was just pointing out that as you say is supported by |
I'm not quite sure what would be the expected behavior on Fleet UI for package vars moved to input vars:
To be honest I find this feature of moving package vars to input vars confusing. @jen-huang could you help answering the questions above? I saw that the related issue was closed. |
Going to close this as discussion in the parent issue(s) have been resolved. |
In #125625 it turned out that the current package policy validation is not complete, it doesn't consider package vars moved inside inputs.
This is causing a failure in aws integration tests.
Vars should be valid in different levels: elastic/package-spec#132
See this discussion: #125625 (comment)
The change in validation that caused this issue to surface was introduced here: #124215
Related issue:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: