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

Extract config logic into own package #743

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Apr 19, 2023
Merged

Extract config logic into own package #743

merged 12 commits into from
Apr 19, 2023

Conversation

sergiught
Copy link
Contributor

@sergiught sergiught commented Apr 15, 2023

🔧 Changes

The main focus of this PR is to extract and contain the entire config logic into one package that is fully testable through unit tests, as right now the config logic is spread through multiple places.

Along the way several minor bugs were also fixed:

  • Always showing the hint to log in to the tenant even if we are logged in when displaying the help for the main command
  • Edge case where we would end up with a corrupted config file

It is advised to review this PR in 3 steps (commit by commit):

  1. Add new config pkg
  2. Add tests for new config pkg
  3. Refactor codebase to use new config pkg

📚 References

🔬 Testing

📝 Checklist

  • All new/changed/fixed functionality is covered by tests (or N/A)
  • I have added documentation for all new/changed functionality (or N/A)

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Apr 15, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 67.35% and project coverage change: +0.45 🎉

Comparison is base (e53b3d3) 71.17% compared to head (fc7f35e) 71.63%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #743      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   71.17%   71.63%   +0.45%     
==========================================
  Files          87       89       +2     
  Lines       11162    11159       -3     
==========================================
+ Hits         7945     7994      +49     
+ Misses       2700     2661      -39     
+ Partials      517      504      -13     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
internal/cli/roles_permissions.go 62.25% <0.00%> (+2.06%) ⬆️
internal/display/tenants.go 68.18% <0.00%> (-20.06%) ⬇️
internal/cli/login.go 36.63% <22.22%> (+1.51%) ⬆️
internal/cli/apps.go 78.63% <25.00%> (ø)
internal/cli/tenants.go 63.26% <28.57%> (+1.72%) ⬆️
internal/cli/cli.go 45.12% <37.20%> (-14.68%) ⬇️
internal/cli/utils_shared.go 55.61% <40.00%> (ø)
internal/cli/test.go 46.96% <50.00%> (+2.13%) ⬆️
internal/config/tenant.go 52.11% <52.11%> (ø)
internal/cli/root.go 90.84% <61.53%> (-1.64%) ⬇️
... and 8 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@sergiught sergiught force-pushed the patch/config-pkg branch 4 times, most recently from 2be0048 to 8efc96d Compare April 17, 2023 11:49
Base automatically changed from patch/remove-apps-first-runs-tracking to main April 17, 2023 13:27
@sergiught sergiught self-assigned this Apr 17, 2023
@sergiught sergiught marked this pull request as ready for review April 17, 2023 17:00
@sergiught sergiught requested a review from a team as a code owner April 17, 2023 17:00
}

// RegenerateAccessToken regenerates the access token for the tenant.
func (t *Tenant) RegenerateAccessToken(ctx context.Context) error {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the only func that doesn't have tests, unfortunately it's extremely hard to test this through unit tests due to lack of sensible abstractions.

Ideally we would refactor the auth and keyring packages next and the entire logic below we could replace with a strategy pattern delegating the actual logic to the auth pkg through an interface that we could mock.

For now I kept this as it was.

}

if err := checkInstallID(cli); err != nil {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This logic is now part of the AddTenant func on the Config.

var ErrNoAuthenticatedTenants = errors.New("Not logged in. Try `auth0 login`.")

// Config holds cli configuration settings.
type Config struct {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should we expose an interface with Config's methods, and then use the interface in the cli struct, so that the config can be mocked? It would be useful for testing functions that use config methods like GetTenant(), such as this one: https://github.com/auth0/auth0-cli/blob/main/internal/cli/apps.go#L882

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

IMO it's unnecessary as right now we can simply inject an in-memory Config struct with any values we might need for testing.

So the setup to test for example the appPickerOptions func would be similar to:

tempFile := createTempConfigFile(t, []byte(`
{
"install_id": "3998b053-dd7f-4bfe-bb10-c4f3a96a0180",
"default_tenant": "auth0-cli.eu.auth0.com",
"tenants": {
"auth0-cli.eu.auth0.com": {
"name": "auth0-cli",
"domain": "auth0-cli.eu.auth0.com",
"access_token": "eyfSaswe",
"expires_at": "2023-04-18T11:18:07.998809Z",
"client_id": "secret"
}
}
}
`))
expectedTenant := Tenant{
Name: "auth0-cli",
Domain: "auth0-cli.eu.auth0.com",
AccessToken: "eyfSaswe",
ExpiresAt: time.Date(2023, time.April, 18, 11, 18, 7, 998809000, time.UTC),
ClientID: "secret",
}
config := &Config{Path: tempFile}
actualTenant, err := config.GetTenant("auth0-cli.eu.auth0.com")
assert.NoError(t, err)
assert.Equal(t, expectedTenant, actualTenant)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That involves creating an actual temp config file. But it certainly does the trick.

@@ -479,7 +479,7 @@ func createAppCmd(cli *cli) *cobra.Command {
return fmt.Errorf("Unable to create application: %v", err)
}

if err := cli.setDefaultAppID(a.GetClientID()); err != nil {
if err := cli.Config.SaveNewDefaultAppIDForTenant(cli.tenant, a.GetClientID()); err != nil {
Copy link
Contributor

@Widcket Widcket Apr 17, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe SetDefaultAppForTenant()? Seems a bit verbose. Totally a nit, though. Not a blocker.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah I like that to be honest, I'll do the same with SetDefaultTenant. 👍🏻 Thanks @Widcket

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

954f34b (#743) I also realized we can set the path to private instead of having it public.

Comment on lines +417 to +423
"auth0-mega-cli.eu.auth0.com": {
"name": "auth0-mega-cli",
"domain": "auth0-mega-cli.eu.auth0.com",
"access_token": "eyfSaswe",
"expires_at": "2023-04-18T11:18:07.998809Z",
"client_id": "secret"
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Would be nice to add a third tenant here to make it clear what happens if there are multiple "fallbacks".

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In Go, maps are unordered collections of key/value pairs. When you range over a map, the order in which the key/value pairs are returned is not guaranteed and can vary between different runs of the program. We can add logic to have a consistent sorting and always set the default tenant to a more predictable one but I'd avoid it IMO as it feels unnecessary. Wdyt?

Reference: https://go.dev/blog/maps Iteration order

}

func TestConfig_SaveNewDefaultTenant(t *testing.T) {
t.Run("it can successfully save a new tenant default", func(t *testing.T) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reminder: Test case for validating that default tenant actually exists in config.

})
}

func TestConfig_IsLoggedInWithTenant(t *testing.T) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reminder: Needs test case for access token in keyring.

}`))

config := &Config{path: tempFile}
assert.False(t, config.IsLoggedInWithTenant(""))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fix:

Suggested change
assert.False(t, config.IsLoggedInWithTenant(""))
assert.False(t, config.IsLoggedInWithTenant("auth0-cli.eu.auth0.com"))

@sergiught sergiught marked this pull request as draft April 18, 2023 16:47
@sergiught sergiught marked this pull request as ready for review April 18, 2023 19:39
@sergiught sergiught requested a review from willvedd April 18, 2023 19:39
Copy link
Contributor

@willvedd willvedd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Solid improvement 👍

@sergiught sergiught merged commit f6112ce into main Apr 19, 2023
@sergiught sergiught deleted the patch/config-pkg branch April 19, 2023 09:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants