-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 58
More proto updates #1358
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
More proto updates #1358
Conversation
FYI @ramonpetgrave64:
BTW, now that I had a look at it, I think the current RekorClient is a bit of a mess: it probably needs a redesign even without rekor-tiles. |
a45d567
to
669c49b
Compare
Thanks @jku! I'll review now.
We can close #1276; you've made much more progress than I've had time to 🙂
Sounds good to me! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM! Thanks a ton for taking over the old PR and pushing this through + making the SigningConfig
changes. If I'm not mistaken we shouldn't need a CHANGELOG entry here, since this should all be internal API changes 🙂
The one thing I now started thinging about is For reference: We could add some code to still handle v0.1: the problem is that it can't really be complete support (since 0.1 is not extensive enough) so I'd rather drop it assuming that it's not going annoy too many people |
@woodruffw or @di a final review would be welcome (I only added a changelog line after last review) |
Signed-off-by: William Woodruff <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: William Woodruff <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: William Woodruff <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: William Woodruff <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: William Woodruff <[email protected]>
Verifier only needs a Rekor client for the detached materials hack in _cli... and it should not be using SigningConfig to get it. * This is an API change for Verifier: I believe the proposed API should be stable now * RekorClient definitely needs more work: I'm just punting the can down the road here. Signed-off-by: Jussi Kukkonen <[email protected]>
* Let's forget that v0.1 ever existed (it was not really used): We could try to support both but since 0.1 does not really work, I won't bother * Support signing config v0.2 in a minimal way (see note on selectors below) Things that could be improved: * Rekor client is still a bit of a hack: that area likely needs a redesign * The "service selectors" in SigningConfig are not all yet supported: Only the ANY selector works (this is the one staging will use soon) * The CLI does not yet use the OIDC provider specified in SigningConfig (this should be a small refactor) Signed-off-by: Jussi Kukkonen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jussi Kukkonen <[email protected]>
rebased, fixed conflicts |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, thanks @jku!
Related: are we considering this a breaking change, i.e. a runup for a v4 release? Technically it changes the (I don't have a super strong opinion here, since ~nobody is probably using the current |
This is built on top of #1276: I'm fine with merging that first or closing that one and merging all the proto changes at once in this PR.
This PR upgrades us to the most recent protobuf-specs. Changes include (on top of 1276):
SigningConfig
class has been added to handle parsing the data in itI'd like to handle followups in other PRS, mainly I'm thinking of: