Add support for gcp secrets and labels #11
Conversation
|
Warning Rate Limit Exceeded@kongzii has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 21 minutes and 31 seconds before requesting another review. How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. WalkthroughThe recent updates focus on enhancing deployment scripts for Google Cloud Platform (GCP) by introducing more flexible configuration options. Key changes involve removing the dependency on Changes
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 0
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (3)
- examples/cloud_deployment/gcp/deploy.py (2 hunks)
- prediction_market_agent_tooling/deploy/gcp/deploy.py (2 hunks)
- prediction_market_agent_tooling/deploy/gcp/utils.py (2 hunks)
Additional comments: 8
examples/cloud_deployment/gcp/deploy.py (4)
- 2-2:
getpassimport is added to usegetpass.getuser()for dynamically setting theownerlabel. This is a secure way to retrieve the current user's login name without hardcoding.- 17-17: Setting
requirements_filetoNonealigns with the PR objective to remove therequirements_fileparameter in favor of a more flexible setup. Ensure all dependent scripts are updated accordingly.Verification successful
The verification process has confirmed that the
requirements_fileparameter is set toNonein thedeploy_to_gcpfunction call withindeploy.py, and no other instances of this function being called with therequirements_fileparameter were found in the repository. This aligns with the PR's objective to remove therequirements_fileparameter in favor of a more flexible setup, and all dependent scripts appear to be updated accordingly.* 19-19: Updating `extra_deps` with a new repository link is correct. Ensure the repository link is accessible and the `main` branch contains the required dependencies.Scripts Executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for files that might still be passing `requirements_file` to `deploy_to_gcp`. ast-grep --lang python --pattern $'deploy_to_gcp($$$, requirements_file=$$$, $$$)'Length of output: 1813
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Broaden the search to find any calls to `deploy_to_gcp` to ensure no calls are passing `requirements_file`. ast-grep --lang python --pattern $'deploy_to_gcp($$$)'Length of output: 1785
Verification successful
The initial verification script used an incorrect URL format for checking the repository's accessibility via HTTP. Let's correct the URL format and try again to verify the repository's accessibility.
The corrected URL verification script successfully accessed the GitHub repository, as indicated by the HTTP 200 status code in the output. This confirms that the repository link
https://github.com/gnosis/prediction-market-agent-toolingis accessible. However, without further information or the ability to browse the repository's contents, we cannot directly verify if themainbranch contains the required dependencies. The initial task was to ensure the repository link is accessible and to check for the presence of required dependencies in themainbranch. The accessibility of the repository has been confirmed, but the second part of the task remains outside the scope of this verification process due to its limitations.Given the information available and the limitations of this process, the repository's accessibility has been verified.
* 23-30: The introduction of `labels`, `env_vars`, and `secrets` parameters is in line with the PR objectives. Ensure the format and usage of these parameters are consistent with GCP requirements and best practices. - For `labels`, verify the format (lowercase letters, numbers, hyphens, underscores) is enforced in the code that generates these labels. - For `secrets`, ensure the format "env_var_in_container => secret_name:version" is validated before deployment to avoid runtime errors.Scripts Executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the repository link is accessible. curl -I https://github.com/gnosis/prediction-market-agent-tooling.git@mainLength of output: 1769
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Corrected command to verify the repository link is accessible. curl -I https://github.com/gnosis/prediction-market-agent-toolingLength of output: 4534
prediction_market_agent_tooling/deploy/gcp/utils.py (2)
- 13-15: Adding
labels,env_vars, andsecretsas parameters togcloud_deploy_cmdis correct and aligns with the PR objectives. Ensure the types of these parameters are consistently documented and validated.- 29-34: The loop constructs for appending
labels,env_vars, andsecretsto the deployment command are correct. However, ensure that the values forlabelsandsecretsare properly sanitized to prevent command injection vulnerabilities.prediction_market_agent_tooling/deploy/gcp/deploy.py (2)
- 26-28: Replacing
api_keyswithlabels,env_vars, andsecretsin thedeploy_to_gcpfunction's signature is correct and aligns with the PR objectives. Ensure that all calls to this function are updated to use the new parameters.Verification successful
The absence of results from the script execution suggests that there are no calls to
deploy_to_gcpwithapi_keysas a parameter in the codebase. This aligns with the PR's objective of replacingapi_keyswithlabels,env_vars, andsecrets. Therefore, it can be concluded that the changes have been correctly implemented.* 69-71: The implementation of `labels`, `env_vars`, and `secrets` in the `gcloud_deploy_cmd` call within `deploy_to_gcp` is correct. Ensure the values passed to these parameters are validated and sanitized to prevent runtime errors and security vulnerabilities.Scripts Executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for files that might still be passing `api_keys` to `deploy_to_gcp`. ast-grep --lang python --pattern $'deploy_to_gcp($$$, api_keys=$$$, $$$)'Length of output: 74
| "owner": getpass.getuser() | ||
| }, # Only lowercase letters, numbers, hyphens and underscores are allowed. | ||
| env_vars={"MARKET": "MANIFOLD"}, | ||
| # You can allow the cloud function to access secrets by adding the role: `gcloud projects add-iam-policy-binding ${GCP_PROJECT_ID} --member=serviceAccount:${GCP_SVC_ACC} --role=roles/container.admin`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice! How do you know what to set GCP_SVC_ACC to here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You can find it in the console of your cloud function, or you can deploy the function with a specified service account:
| labels={ | ||
| "owner": getpass.getuser() | ||
| }, # Only lowercase letters, numbers, hyphens and underscores are allowed. | ||
| env_vars={"MARKET": "MANIFOLD"}, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this just metadata that you're speculatively adding here because it might be useful down the line? We could add this inside deploy_to_gcp based on the value of market_type
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This was meant to be just an example about the env vars, didn't know what other to put here.
But agreed that such information could be added automatically.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Renamed this and can confirm the deployment works:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 0
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (1)
- examples/cloud_deployment/gcp/deploy.py (2 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- examples/cloud_deployment/gcp/deploy.py
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 0
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (1)
- examples/cloud_deployment/gcp/deploy.py (2 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- examples/cloud_deployment/gcp/deploy.py
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 0
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (3)
- examples/cloud_deployment/gcp/deploy.py (2 hunks)
- prediction_market_agent_tooling/deploy/gcp/deploy.py (2 hunks)
- prediction_market_agent_tooling/deploy/gcp/utils.py (2 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
- examples/cloud_deployment/gcp/deploy.py
- prediction_market_agent_tooling/deploy/gcp/deploy.py
- prediction_market_agent_tooling/deploy/gcp/utils.py
kongzii
force-pushed
the
peter/gcp-secrets-labels
branch
from
0079c55
to
56fe592
Compare
Summary by CodeRabbit
api_keyswithlabelsand adding support forenv_varsand secrets management.