Skip to content

list/MMv1: unionize allProps within listScope to include url_param_only values#17985

Open
BBBmau wants to merge 1 commit into
GoogleCloudPlatform:mainfrom
BBBmau:unionize-allprops-listScope
Open

list/MMv1: unionize allProps within listScope to include url_param_only values#17985
BBBmau wants to merge 1 commit into
GoogleCloudPlatform:mainfrom
BBBmau:unionize-allprops-listScope

Conversation

@BBBmau

@BBBmau BBBmau commented Jun 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

We run into a case found in

List scope detection previously only used identity/import fields, so required URL-only scope values (like crypto_key) were missed.

This change includes all relevant properties when deriving list scope, deduplicates matches, and adds a regression test for the CryptoKeyVersion pattern.

Needed to merge #17984 as it becomes passing afterwards

Release Note Template for Downstream PRs (will be copied)

See Write release notes for guidance.


@modular-magician

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Hi there, I'm the Modular magician. I've detected the following information about your changes for commit dc0c682:

Diff report

Your PR hasn't generated any diffs, but I'll let you know if a future commit does.

@BBBmau BBBmau requested a review from melinath June 17, 2026 19:59

@melinath melinath left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just to make sure I understand this correctly - what exactly is a ListScope? It looks like IdentityProperties is specifically related to Resource Identity, which is also a core part of list resources, but is different from list scope?

To put this another way: is this a problem with ListScopeProperties or a problem with IdentityProperties? If a particular field is in base_url but not in import_format, wouldn't that need to still be part of the resource identity?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants