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

Split domain to which LIO requests are directed to envvar #300

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 18, 2024

Conversation

bdach
Copy link
Collaborator

@bdach bdach commented Nov 18, 2024

On several occasions, I've tried to test something involving LIO full-stack and forgot that the LIO helper hardcodes production. Thankfully I never did damage due to the interop secret check, but it's a bit bone-chilling every time. Additionally I believe this situation can't be correct as far as staging is involved, either.

The envvar is LEGACY_IO_DOMAIN (open to alternative naming suggestions). Same as the shared interop secret, this envvar is optional in debug (and it missing causes LIO to become a no-op), and required with no default and hard-fail on missing in release.

cc @ThePooN as requested (for presumed deployment config updates)

On several occasions, I've tried to test something involving LIO
full-stack and forgot that the LIO helper hardcodes production.
Thankfully I never did damage due to the interop secret check, but it's
a bit bone-chilling every time. Additionally I believe this situation
can't be correct as far as staging is involved, either.

Same as the shared interop secret, this envvar is optional in debug (and
it missing causes LIO to become a no-op), and required with no default
in release.
@peppy peppy merged commit 2481e03 into ppy:master Nov 18, 2024
3 checks passed
@ThePooN
Copy link
Member

ThePooN commented Nov 19, 2024

mmh, perhaps should've re_used APP_URL from osu-web?

@bdach
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bdach commented Nov 19, 2024

I guess, although to me APP_URL seems sorta... non-specific? Can change if you think it's worth the effort...

@ThePooN
Copy link
Member

ThePooN commented Nov 19, 2024

nah, dont think its worth it. on a second thought, it would be a confusing one to override for internal routing as well.

@bdach bdach deleted the domain-to-envvar branch November 20, 2024 05:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants