DEVPROD-11847 remove create version route #8368
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Kimchelly
reviewed
Oct 4, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we do this, we also have to delete evergreen create-version since it uses this route. We should also close DEVPROD-11844 and update the email that was just sent out about evergreen create-version since the functionality will not exist anymore.
|
Oooooof okay Idk why I assumed that used a different endpoint... let me consider bringing it back and just fixing the route, since we just told Trevor about it |
Kimchelly
approved these changes
Oct 4, 2024
|
apologies for chaos haha |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
DEVPROD-11847
Description
This route isn't authed strictly enough, allows you to bypass adhoc versions, and use admin only variables.
Testing
Wrote a test for admin only variables to make sure we think about our requesters and whether they should have admin-only variable access explicitly.
Documentation
ran swaggo