Hi Rodric, I agree, that the key should not be passed to the action, if it is not required. But in my opinion, existing actions should continue to work without any update. But I'm OK, if all newly created actions have the default, that they don't have an API-key.
Greetings Christian Am Mi., 13. Feb. 2019 um 22:53 Uhr schrieb Rodric Rabbah <[email protected]>: > Thanks for the quick initial feedback. > I've opened a PR that excludes just the API key. > https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/pull/4284 > > This will be a breaking change - actions that are deployed already and > which need the key will need to be updated. > I added the annotation `-a provide-api-key true`. > > I think the default should be no key but we have to address the change in > behavior. > > -r > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:32 PM David P Grove <[email protected]> wrote: > > > +1 my thoughts exactly. > > > > --dave > > > > Tyson Norris <[email protected]> wrote on 02/13/2019 04:28:35 > PM: > > > > > > I agree the api_key is bad, when not using e.g. OW npm within the > > > action. +1 for using an annotation to enable this. > > > > > > activation_id is required to do the right thing for logging with > > > concurrency enabled - but I'm also not sure what risk it is to > > > include that? It will be in the response header anyways still right? > > > > > > Namespace + action - similar to activation_id, this is already > > > available to the client and may have some convenience for action > > > devs (especially with logging concurrent actiavitons __ ) > > > > > > From my perspective, I would just change the api_key to be > > > explicitly passed, and leave the rest as-is. > > > > > >
