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

The service account description reported back as name on describe #1403

Open
ppatierno opened this issue Jan 29, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

The service account description reported back as name on describe #1403

ppatierno opened this issue Jan 29, 2022 · 3 comments
Labels
good first issue Good for newcomers

Comments

@ppatierno
Copy link
Contributor

When a service account is create via the rhoas service-account create command, it's possible to provide a so called description via the --short-description parameter.
When we use the rhoas service-account describe command, such an information is reported back as name field in the JSON and not as description.

{
  "client_id": "srvc-acct-XXXXXXXXXXXXX",
  "created_at": "2022-01-29T13:24:24Z",
  "href": "/api/kafkas_mgmt/v1/service_accounts/XXXXXXXXXXXXX",
  "id": "XXXXXXXXXXXX",
  "name": "formaula1-udp-kafka",
  "owner": "ppatiern"
}

Isn't it better to be consistent across them. I think that the name field would be much better as option in the creation command insted of the short description imho.

@wtrocki
Copy link
Collaborator

wtrocki commented Jan 29, 2022

Reported that to backend team.
We will still return name for backwards compatibility

@ppatierno
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sorry to be precise, I think that name' in the json is totally right. I think that --short-descriptionis bad and should be--name` on creation to be consistent.

@wtrocki
Copy link
Collaborator

wtrocki commented Feb 1, 2022

After discussion with team we have two options:

  1. reintroduce name, but keep --short-description as alias
  2. add description to short description (flagging that api field will be present as name

So while we not going to fix the core issue I think we can do nr2 easily (it is only content change)
Benefit of that will be that we going to have this in the CLI and documentation resolving confusion around this.

@wtrocki wtrocki added good first issue Good for newcomers and removed blocked labels Feb 13, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
good first issue Good for newcomers
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants