Service account improvements #3109
Conversation
c2c3882 to
6e8d054
Compare
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3109 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 95.72% 95.73% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 98 98
Lines 6052 6067 +15
==========================================
+ Hits 5793 5808 +15
Misses 259 259
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
6e8d054 to
681168e
Compare
|
Thanks a lot for your contribution @zapp42! If you don't mind I'd wait until @igorp-collabora's #3083 is merged (it's a big one) to avoid too many rebases on the other PR. Once that's merged I'll propose a few tiny changes here to align with the new typing. Tests would be great (even if simple functional ones) but we can make a follow-up, no problem! |
|
@zapp42 would you be able to rebase this now? |
|
@zapp42 after the #3083 the RESTManager is now generic and mixins are subclasses. This means the class definition instead of: Should be: |
|
@igorp-collabora I will give it a shot over the weekend. |
f338500 to
1f5309e
Compare
|
Note: I struggled with the group service account access token api. I did not find another example in the code base where you have this kind of nested objects (group -> service_account -> access_token). It is currently not hooked up in the API, but it works in the cli tool. A hint for adding the group service account access token api is appreciated. |
The RESTObject can have managers defined in its body. For example, Project object has a bunch of managers defined: python-gitlab/gitlab/v4/objects/projects.py Lines 175 to 190 in 22be96c |
|
@igorp-collabora Thank you. I actually tried this before, but I messed up the _from_parent_attrs definition. Now it works as expected. |
bacda18 to
40dbb29
Compare
|
This is great! @zapp42 would it be possible to add some documentation and functional tests? Happy to help support this. |
|
@SachinKSingh28 Hi, sorry, I forgot to check for comments here. What do you need? |
40dbb29 to
d071d9a
Compare
d071d9a to
cd9cfa8
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Overview
This PR adds support for instance-level service accounts and group-level service account access tokens, along with basic tests and client exposure.
- Introduce
ServiceAccountandServiceAccountManagerfor global service accounts - Add
GroupServiceAccountAccessTokenand its manager to handle group service account tokens - Update tests for creating/deleting service accounts and tokens, and expose
service_accountsin the client
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 4 out of 4 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| tests/unit/objects/test_service_accounts.py | Add unit tests for creating instance-level service accounts |
| tests/unit/objects/test_groups.py | Add fixtures and tests for group service accounts and access tokens |
| gitlab/v4/objects/service_accounts.py | Implement ServiceAccount, managers, and group service account token classes |
| gitlab/client.py | Expose service_accounts manager in the GitLab client |
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (3)
gitlab/v4/objects/service_accounts.py:53
- GroupServiceAccountManager is missing ListMixin, preventing listing group service accounts; include ListMixin[GroupServiceAccount] in the inheritance list.
class GroupServiceAccountManager(
tests/unit/objects/test_groups.py:545
- The deletion test has no assertion to verify the DELETE call succeeded; consider adding an assertion (e.g., checking that listing no longer returns the deleted account).
def test_delete_group_service_account(group, resp_delete_group_service_account):
tests/unit/objects/test_groups.py:552
- After creating an access token, the test does not assert the returned token value; add an assertion for
access_token.tokento ensure the token is correctly returned.
def test_create_group_service_account_access_token(
| class ServiceAccount(RESTObject): | ||
| pass | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| class ServiceAccountManager(CreateMixin[ServiceAccount], ListMixin[ServiceAccount]): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ServiceAccount currently has no delete support; add ObjectDeleteMixin to the class and DeleteMixin to ServiceAccountManager so that instance-level service accounts can be deleted.
| class ServiceAccount(RESTObject): | |
| pass | |
| class ServiceAccountManager(CreateMixin[ServiceAccount], ListMixin[ServiceAccount]): | |
| class ServiceAccount(ObjectDeleteMixin, RESTObject): | |
| pass | |
| class ServiceAccountManager(CreateMixin[ServiceAccount], DeleteMixin[ServiceAccount], ListMixin[ServiceAccount]): |
|
It seems this PR has stalled. That's a pity because we are eagerly awaiting this functionality. Are there any plans on finishing this? |
cd9cfa8 to
8dfc6c8
Compare
Changes
Documentation and testing
Note: I have done only very basic tests (creation) and also did not include tests. Sorry for that. If you don't want to merge it like this, maybe it can at least serve as a template for someone else.