feat(core): Context support in logger + logging code owners #17092
Conversation
WalkthroughThis pull request introduces several changes across multiple files, primarily focusing on the addition of Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
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 using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #17092 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 35.72% 35.74% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 6920 6925 +5
Lines 147501 147558 +57
Branches 42003 42009 +6
==========================================
+ Hits 52688 52746 +58
+ Misses 94813 94812 -1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
... and 3 files with indirect coverage changes Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (56)
apps/services/endorsements/api/infra/endorsement-system-api.ts (1)
Line range hint
1-24: Consider documenting code ownership in READMEThe addition of code ownership is a significant architectural change. Consider adding documentation in the service's README to:
- Explain the code ownership concept
- Document Juni's responsibilities
- Describe the process for ownership changes
- List related services owned by the same team
This will help maintain clear ownership boundaries and assist in incident response.
charts/services/services-sessions/values.dev.yaml (1)
Line range hint
1-6:⚠️ Caution: This file is auto-generatedThe file header explicitly states that manual edits should not be made directly to this file. Instead, changes should be made through the source configuration and regenerated using "yarn charts".
Please ensure this change is made through the appropriate source configuration files instead of directly modifying this generated file.
charts/services/services-sessions/values.staging.yaml (1)
22-22: Document code ownership assignmentThe addition of
CODE_OWNER: 'aranja'aligns with the PR's objective to enhance log tracking. However, consider documenting:
- The criteria for assigning code ownership
- The process for updating code owners
- The implications for logging and DevOps workflows
Would you like me to help create a documentation template for code ownership?
charts/services/services-sessions/values.prod.yaml (1)
Line range hint
1-8: Consider documenting the code ownership structure.While the warning header indicates this file is auto-generated, it would be beneficial to document the code ownership structure and its implications in a relevant documentation file (e.g., README.md).
This documentation should cover:
- Purpose of CODE_OWNER variable
- How it integrates with the logging system
- Impact on DevOps and team responsibility assignment
apps/services/bff/infra/admin-portal.infra.ts (1)
Line range hint
13-70: Consider documenting the code ownership impactThe service configuration is well-structured, but it would be helpful to add a comment explaining how the code ownership affects logging and monitoring for this BFF service.
Add a comment before the service configuration:
const serviceName = `${bffName}-${clientName}` const key = 'stjornbord' +// This service is owned by the Core team, which means all logs and errors +// from this BFF will be tagged with their ownership for better tracking +// and incident response. export const serviceSetup = ( services: BffInfraServices,apps/web/infra/web.ts (1)
Line range hint
1-93: Consider documenting service ownership transitionsWhile the code owner specification is correctly implemented, this is a critical infrastructure configuration file.
Consider:
- Adding a comment explaining why Stefna is the code owner
- Documenting the process for transitioning code ownership
- Creating runbooks for DevOps teams to handle incidents based on code ownership
This documentation will be valuable for:
- Future maintainers understanding ownership decisions
- DevOps teams routing incidents correctly
- Smooth ownership transitions between teams
charts/services/web/values.prod.yaml (1)
Line range hint
1-6: Warning: This file should not be edited manuallyThe file header explicitly states this is an automatically generated file. Changes should be made through the source configuration and regenerated using "yarn charts".
Please ensure you're following the correct process to update this file.
charts/services/consultation-portal/values.staging.yaml (1)
25-25: Consider externalizing the CODE_OWNER valueWhile adding 'Advania' as the CODE_OWNER aligns with the logging enhancement initiative, hardcoding the value in the staging values file might make it difficult to maintain across environments. Consider moving this to a more centralized configuration or making it configurable through a parameter.
charts/services/consultation-portal/values.prod.yaml (1)
Line range hint
1-7:⚠️ Manual changes to auto-generated files may be overwrittenThe file header explicitly states this is an automatically generated file. Any manual changes should instead be made to the source templates or configuration that generates this file using "yarn charts".
apps/consultation-portal/infra/samradsgatt.ts (1)
Line range hint
28-42: Consider adding environment variable validationThe environment configuration is comprehensive, but consider adding runtime validation for critical environment variables to fail fast if they're misconfigured.
Example approach:
.env({ ... validate: { required: ['API_URL', 'IDENTITY_SERVER_ISSUER_DOMAIN'], format: { 'NEXTAUTH_URL': (url) => url.startsWith('https://'), } } })charts/services/user-notification-cleanup-worker/values.staging.yaml (2)
Line range hint
1-6:⚠️ Warning: This file should not be edited manuallyThe file header explicitly states that manual edits should be avoided and suggests running "yarn charts" instead. Please ensure this change is made through the appropriate generation process rather than direct modification.
28-28: Consider documenting code ownershipSince this is part of a larger initiative to improve log tracking and team responsibility, consider adding a comment in the values file explaining the purpose of the CODE_OWNER variable and its relationship to logging.
env: + # CODE_OWNER defines the team responsible for this service's logs and maintenance CODE_OWNER: 'juni'charts/services/user-notification-cleanup-worker/values.dev.yaml (1)
28-28: Consider centralizing code owner configurations.Instead of defining code owners individually in each service's values file, consider:
- Creating a central configuration for mapping services to code owners
- Using Helm's value inheritance to define defaults
- Implementing validation for allowed code owner values
This would make it easier to maintain consistent ownership across services and environments.
charts/services/user-notification-cleanup-worker/values.prod.yaml (1)
Line range hint
1-7: Consider adding CODE_OWNER documentation in the file headerSince this is an automatically generated file (as per the header comment), consider updating the generation template to include documentation about the CODE_OWNER variable and its purpose in the logging system.
apps/services/sessions/infra/sessions.ts (2)
Line range hint
46-85: Consider adding code ownership to worker and cleanup jobsWhile the main service has code ownership defined, the worker and cleanup jobs don't have code ownership specified. This might affect operational visibility when debugging worker or cleanup-related issues.
Consider adding
.codeOwner(CodeOwners.Aranja)to bothworkerSetupandcleanupSetupfunctions for consistent ownership across all components of the service.
Line range hint
8-13: Consider adding documentation for code ownershipSince code ownership is a new feature being implemented across services, consider adding a comment explaining its purpose and impact on logging/monitoring.
Add a comment like:
export const serviceSetup = (): ServiceBuilder<'services-sessions'> => + // Code owner configuration enables request tracking and log attribution + // for the Sessions service maintained by Aranja team service('services-sessions')apps/services/license-api/infra/license-api.ts (1)
19-19: Consider making code ownership configurable per environment.While the static assignment of
CodeOwners.Hugsmidjanworks, consider making it environment-specific like other configurations in this file. This would provide flexibility for different teams managing the service across environments.Example approach:
- .codeOwner(CodeOwners.Hugsmidjan) + .codeOwner({ + dev: CodeOwners.Hugsmidjan, + staging: CodeOwners.Hugsmidjan, + prod: CodeOwners.Hugsmidjan + })apps/services/university-gateway/infra/university-gateway.ts (1)
Line range hint
34-39: Consider adding request context to environment variablesSince this PR introduces logging context support, consider adding relevant environment variables for request tracking, such as:
- REQUEST_CONTEXT_ENABLED
- REQUEST_CONTEXT_FIELDS
This would help in standardizing what context information gets logged across different services.charts/services/regulations-admin-backend/values.dev.yaml (1)
⚠️ Changes must be made through the chart generation processThe file is indeed automatically generated through the
yarn chartscommand, which runs the generation script atinfra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts. Any changes tovalues.dev.yamlshould be made by modifying the chart generation source code in theinfra/directory rather than editing the generated file directly.
- The generation script is located at
infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts- The chart values are derived from configurations in
infra/src/uber-charts/- The proper way to modify the environment variables is to update the chart definitions in the source code
🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
1-5:⚠️ Verify the file generation processThis file is marked as automatically generated with instructions to run "yarn charts". Ensure that your changes are made through the appropriate generation process rather than direct file modification.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check if there's a charts generation script and its location fd -g "*charts*.{js,ts,sh}" -x echo "Found charts script: {}"Length of output: 390
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check package.json for charts-related scripts rg -g "package.json" "charts" -A 3 -B 3 # Check the content of the chart values generation script cat infra/scripts/ci/diff-chart-values-all-charts.shLength of output: 1741
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the chart values generation source cat infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts # Also check if there are any other value files in the same directory fd -g "values*.yaml" -p charts/services/regulations-admin-backend/Length of output: 2620
charts/services/services-bff-portals-admin/values.staging.yaml (1)
Line range hint
1-5: Document code ownership valuesSince this file is automatically generated (as per the header comment), consider adding documentation about:
- The available code ownership values (e.g., 'core', 'aranja')
- The process for updating these values
- The impact on logging and team responsibility assignment
Would you like me to help create a documentation template for this?
Also applies to: 33-33
apps/services/auth/delegation-api/infra/delegation-api.ts (1)
Line range hint
19-33: Consider adding code ownership documentationWhile the code owner is now configured programmatically, it would be beneficial to document this ownership in the service's documentation for better visibility and maintenance.
Consider adding a comment block above the service configuration:
+ /** + * Auth Delegation API Service + * Code Owner: Aranja + * Responsible for handling delegation operations in the authentication system. + */ export const serviceSetup = (services: {charts/services/endorsement-system-api/values.dev.yaml (1)
Warning: Changes to auto-generated file will be overwritten
The file is part of an automated chart values generation system controlled by
yarn chartscommand. The generation process:
- Runs through
infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts- Sources values from the uber-charts configuration
- Automatically adds the warning header to prevent manual edits
To properly set the CODE_OWNER value:
- Update the service configuration in the uber-charts instead of modifying the generated file
- Run
yarn chartsto regenerate all values files🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
1-7: Warning: Modifying an auto-generated fileThe file header explicitly states "Do not edit this file manually" and instructs to "Run 'yarn charts' instead". Consider making this change through the proper generation process to ensure it persists through future regenerations.
Let's check how this file is generated:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for the charts generation script fd -t f "charts" -x grep -l "yarn charts" # Look for any configuration files that might control the CODE_OWNER values fd -t f -e json -e yaml -e ts -x grep -l "CODE_OWNER.*juni"Length of output: 935
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's check for any scripts or configuration that generates these chart values fd -t f -e js -e ts -x grep -l "generateChartValues|charts.*generate" # Look for package.json scripts related to charts fd "package.json" -x grep -A 5 -B 5 '"charts":' # Check if there's a charts generation script in the root cat package.json | grep -A 5 -B 5 '"charts":'Length of output: 1851
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's check the chart values generation script cat infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts # Look for any configuration files that might control the CODE_OWNER values fd -t f -e json -e yaml -e ts -x grep -l "CODE_OWNER.*config"Length of output: 2615
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's check the service configuration in uber-charts fd -t f -e ts "endorsement-system-api" infra/src/uber-charts/ # Check the render-env file that's imported in the generation script cat infra/src/cli/render-env.tsLength of output: 551
charts/services/endorsement-system-api/values.staging.yaml (1)
28-28: Document code ownership values.Consider adding documentation that explains:
- The purpose and significance of the CODE_OWNER variable
- The list of valid team identifiers (e.g., 'juni', 'core', 'aranja', etc.)
- The process for updating or assigning code ownership
Would you like me to help create a documentation template for code ownership?
charts/services/search-indexer-service/values.dev.yaml (1)
Line range hint
89-116: Add CODE_OWNER to initContainer.env sectionThe CODE_OWNER environment variable should also be added to the initContainer.env section for consistency, as the init containers might need to include the code owner in their logs.
initContainer: env: AIR_DISCOUNT_SCHEME_FRONTEND_HOSTNAME: 'loftbru.dev01.devland.is' APPLICATION_URL: 'http://search-indexer-service' + CODE_OWNER: 'stefna' CONTENTFUL_ENTRY_FETCH_CHUNK_SIZE: '40'charts/services/search-indexer-service/values.staging.yaml (1)
24-24: Document code ownership valuesConsider adding a comment or documentation that explains:
- The purpose of the
CODE_OWNERvariable- The significance of the 'stefna' value
- The impact on logging and monitoring
Since this is an auto-generated file (as per the header comment), consider adding this documentation in the source template or generation scripts.
charts/services/license-api/values.prod.yaml (1)
Line range hint
1-6: Warning: File is marked as auto-generatedThe file header explicitly states not to edit manually and instructs to run "yarn charts" instead. Please ensure this change is made through the appropriate generation process rather than direct modification.
Consider updating the source configuration and regenerating using
yarn chartscommand.charts/services/services-auth-delegation-api/values.prod.yaml (1)
22-22: Consider documenting the CODE_OWNER environment variable.To improve maintainability, consider adding a comment explaining the purpose and expected values of the
CODE_OWNERvariable in the README or deployment documentation.charts/services/license-api/values.staging.yaml (1)
22-22: LGTM! Consider documenting code ownershipThe addition of
CODE_OWNER: 'hugsmidjan'aligns with the PR objectives for better log tracking and team accountability. This will help DevOps identify responsible teams for specific applications or errors.Consider documenting the code ownership structure in a central location (e.g., README.md) to help teams understand:
- The purpose and impact of the CODE_OWNER variable
- How it integrates with the logging system
- The process for updating or changing code ownership
charts/services/application-system-api-worker/values.prod.yaml (1)
⚠️ Manual edits to values.prod.yaml are not allowedThe verification confirms that this file is automatically generated through the
yarn chartscommand, which runs a sophisticated generation process defined ininfra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts. Any direct modifications tovalues.prod.yamlwill be overwritten by this process. Instead:
- The CODE_OWNER environment variable should be added through the chart generation source files
- Changes should be made in the appropriate configuration source and then regenerated using
yarn charts🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
1-7:⚠️ Verify the generation process for this configuration fileThe file header explicitly states not to edit manually and instructs to run "yarn charts" instead. Please ensure this change was made through the proper generation process rather than direct modification.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check if there's a charts generation script fd -g "*charts*.{js,ts,sh}" -x echo "Found charts script: {}"Length of output: 390
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the content of the charts generation script and related files cat ./infra/src/uber-charts/all-charts.tsLength of output: 1050
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's check the package.json to understand the "yarn charts" command cat package.json | grep -A 5 '"charts":'Length of output: 284
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the infra package.json for the charts script cat infra/package.json | grep -A 5 '"charts":'Length of output: 386
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the chart values generation script cat infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.tsLength of output: 2551
charts/services/application-system-api-worker/values.staging.yaml (1)
30-30: Consider documenting code ownership mapping.To improve maintainability, consider adding documentation that maps code owners to their respective services/teams.
Would you like me to help create a documentation template for code ownership mapping? This could be added to the repository's documentation to help teams understand the ownership structure.
charts/services/services-auth-admin-api/values.prod.yaml (2)
22-22: LGTM! Consider adding documentation.The addition of CODE_OWNER aligns with the PR objectives for enhanced logging context. Consider adding a comment explaining its purpose and impact on logging.
+ # Code owner value used for logging context to help DevOps identify responsible teams CODE_OWNER: 'aranja'
22-22: Consider a more maintainable approach for team names.Hardcoding the team name directly in the values file might make maintenance challenging as teams evolve. Consider managing team names through a centralized configuration or reference.
Some suggestions:
- Create a separate ConfigMap for team mappings
- Use a reference to a shared configuration
- Document the process for updating team ownership
apps/services/auth/admin-api/infra/auth-admin-api.ts (1)
Line range hint
20-122: Consider adding logging-specific environment variablesWhile the code owner is now configured, consider adding environment variables for logging context configuration to fully support the PR's objective of enhanced logging capabilities. This could include:
- Log level configuration
- Context retention settings
- Datadog integration parameters
This would complement the code ownership implementation and support the broader logging enhancement goals.
charts/services/services-university-gateway/values.prod.yaml (1)
26-26: Consider documenting the code ownership structure.Since this is part of a larger initiative for logging context and code ownership, it would be valuable to document:
- The purpose and significance of the 'origo' code owner
- How this integrates with the logging system
- The team responsibility mapping
Consider adding this information to a central documentation location or README file.
charts/services/services-university-gateway/values.staging.yaml (1)
Line range hint
1-150: Security Review: Ensure sensitive configurations are properly managedWhile not directly related to the CODE_OWNER addition, this configuration file contains sensitive information. Ensure that:
- The auto-generation process securely handles sensitive values
- All secrets are properly managed through Kubernetes secrets (which is currently being done correctly)
- Access to this configuration is restricted in version control
charts/services/services-auth-admin-api/values.dev.yaml (1)
22-22: Consider making CODE_OWNER configurable across environmentsWhile hardcoding 'aranja' as the code owner works for initial implementation, consider making this value more configurable:
- It should be easy to change across different environments (dev/staging/prod)
- It could be derived from a central configuration to maintain consistency
- Consider supporting multiple code owners in the future as mentioned in the PR objectives
Consider moving this to a centralized configuration that can be referenced across different service values files, making it easier to maintain and update code ownership information.
charts/services/user-notification-worker/values.prod.yaml (1)
30-30: Consider externalized configuration for code ownershipWhile adding
CODE_OWNER: 'juni'aligns with the PR objectives, hardcoding the value in the production values file might limit flexibility. Consider:
- Managing code ownership through a centralized configuration service
- Supporting multiple code owners if needed (as mentioned in PR objectives)
- Making it consistent across different environments
This would provide better maintainability and support future requirements like multiple code owners per service.
charts/services/user-notification-worker/values.dev.yaml (2)
30-30: Consider parameterizing the code owner valueWhile the addition of
CODE_OWNERis correct, consider making it configurable through a higher-level values file or through Helm's value overrides for better flexibility across environments.- CODE_OWNER: 'juni' + CODE_OWNER: {{ .Values.global.codeOwner | default "juni" | quote }}
30-30: Document the code ownership conceptThe code owner configuration is part of a larger logging context initiative. Consider adding a comment or documentation that explains:
- The purpose of the CODE_OWNER variable
- How it affects logging
- The relationship with the logging context feature
+ # CODE_OWNER defines the team responsible for this service's logs and errors + # This is used by the logging context feature to help DevOps track issues CODE_OWNER: 'juni'charts/services/service-portal-api/values.prod.yaml (2)
24-24: Document the significance of the code owner valueThe
CODE_OWNERenvironment variable is set to 'aranja' without any documentation explaining its significance or impact on the logging system.Consider adding a comment above this line explaining:
- The purpose of this environment variable
- The significance of the 'aranja' value
- Any implications for log filtering or ownership
+ # Team identifier for log ownership and filtering in Datadog CODE_OWNER: 'aranja'
24-24: Consider a more flexible configuration management approachHardcoding the code owner value in the production values file might not be the most maintainable approach, especially if ownership needs to change or if multiple teams become involved.
Consider:
- Moving this configuration to a centralized team/ownership mapping
- Using a dynamic lookup based on service or application identifiers
- Implementing a validation mechanism to ensure only valid team identifiers are used
charts/services/user-notification-worker/values.staging.yaml (1)
Line range hint
1-7:⚠️ Warning: This file is automatically generatedThe file header explicitly states that manual edits should not be made. Instead, use "yarn charts" to generate the file. Ensure that your changes are made through the appropriate source configuration.
charts/services/service-portal-api/values.dev.yaml (1)
24-24: Consider documenting the code ownership configurationThe addition of
CODE_OWNER: 'aranja'aligns with the PR objectives for enhanced logging and team responsibility tracking. However, consider:
- Adding a comment explaining the purpose and impact of this configuration
- Documenting where and how code ownership values are determined
+ # Specifies the team responsible for this service's logs and maintenance CODE_OWNER: 'aranja'charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.prod.yaml (1)
22-22: Consider documenting code ownership in a central location.While setting the
CODE_OWNERin environment variables works for logging, consider maintaining a central documentation (e.g., CODEOWNERS file) that maps services to their respective owners. This would provide a single source of truth for service ownership.charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.staging.yaml (1)
22-22: Consider documenting code ownership mappingTo improve maintainability, consider:
- Creating a central documentation or configuration file mapping services to their code owners
- Adding a comment or reference to where the code ownership is defined/managed
apps/services/user-notification/infra/user-notification.ts (2)
126-126: Consider documenting ownership in monitoring toolsThe code owner assignment is consistent with the main service. Since this is a worker service with specific resource limits and replication settings, ensure that the ownership information is propagated to monitoring and alerting systems.
Consider adding Juni team contact information or escalation paths in your monitoring system's configuration for alerts related to resource limits or worker failures.
175-175: Consider documenting scheduled maintenance ownershipThe code owner assignment is consistent with other components. Since this is a scheduled cleanup worker with different timing per environment, ensure the Juni team is aware of their ownership responsibilities for maintenance windows.
Consider:
- Documenting the cleanup schedule in a central location accessible to the Juni team
- Setting up automated notifications to the Juni team when cleanup jobs fail
- Establishing maintenance window protocols for each environment
charts/services/services-auth-ids-api/values.dev.yaml (1)
Changes must be made through the chart generation process
Based on the examination of the codebase, the values.dev.yaml files are automatically generated using the
yarn chartscommand, which runs thegenerate-chart-values.tsscript. The script explicitly adds a header warning against manual edits. Any changes to these files should be made through the proper chart generation process by modifying the source configurations and runningyarn charts, not by directly editing the values files.
- The chart generation process is defined in
infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts- Changes should be made to the chart configurations in the source code
- Run
yarn chartsto regenerate all values files🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
1-7: Verify that changes were made through the proper processThe file header indicates it should not be edited manually and changes should be made through
yarn charts. Please confirm that this change was made through the proper process rather than direct file modification.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check if there are recent changes to chart generation scripts git log -n 5 --pretty=format:"%h %s" -- "**/chart*.js" "**/chart*.ts"Length of output: 0
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's try to find chart generation related files and scripts fd -t f "chart" -E "*.yaml" -E "*.yml" # Also search for any package.json that might contain chart-related scripts fd "package.json" -t f -x grep -l "chart" {}Length of output: 3064
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's examine the chart generation process from package.json and related scripts cat ./infra/package.json | jq -r '.scripts | select(.charts != null) // .[]' # Check the chart generation script content cat ./infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts # Look for any recent changes to values.dev.yaml files git log -n 3 --pretty=format:"%h %s" -- "**/values.dev.yaml"Length of output: 2977
apps/services/auth/ids-api/infra/ids-api.ts (1)
35-35: Consider future extensibility of code ownershipWhile the current implementation meets the immediate needs, consider these future improvements:
- Make code ownership configurable via environment variables
- Support multiple code owners for shared responsibilities
- Add documentation for the available CodeOwners enum values
apps/application-system/api/infra/application-system-api.ts (1)
Line range hint
171-173: Consider using environment-specific distribution listsThe recipient email addresses are currently set to individual email addresses in development and staging environments. Consider using distribution lists or environment-specific service accounts for better maintainability and security.
Also applies to: 176-178, 182-184
charts/identity-server/values.prod.yaml (2)
Line range hint
47-50: Consider optimizing resource allocationsThe current resource configurations might benefit from fine-tuning:
- Memory limits are relatively tight, especially for auth-admin-web (256Mi)
- CPU request-to-limit ratios vary significantly across services
- HPA configurations are uniform (90% CPU utilization) but might need service-specific tuning
Consider reviewing actual resource usage patterns in production to optimize these values.
Also applies to: 266-269, 364-367, 481-484, 845-848
Line range hint
219-246: Consider centralizing common configuration parametersMultiple services share identical configuration values for:
- Redis cluster endpoints
- External API endpoints
- Timeout settings
- Feature flags
Consider moving these common configurations to a shared configuration section to improve maintainability and reduce duplication.
Also applies to: 317-344, 414-441, 763-790
charts/identity-server/values.staging.yaml (1)
12-12: Consistent code ownership assignment across servicesThe code owner 'aranja' has been consistently assigned across all identity server services, which aligns well with the PR objectives of enhancing logging capabilities and associating logs with specific code owners.
Consider managing environment-specific values like
CODE_OWNERthrough a centralized configuration management system or using Helm's value overrides for better maintainability across different environments (dev, staging, prod).Also applies to: 221-221, 319-319, 416-416, 765-765
charts/islandis/values.prod.yaml (2)
826-826: Consider documenting code owner assignments.To improve maintainability, consider adding documentation about:
- The purpose and significance of CODE_OWNER values
- The mapping between teams and services
- The process for updating code owner assignments
Also applies to: 994-994, 1295-1295, 1559-1559, 1747-1747, 1844-1844, 2050-2050, 2186-2186, 2340-2340, 2568-2568, 2953-2953, 3058-3058, 3154-3154, 3268-3268
Missing CODE_OWNER assignments in multiple enabled services
Several enabled services are missing CODE_OWNER assignments, which could impact service ownership and maintenance responsibilities. Key services without CODE_OWNER include:
- air-discount-scheme-api
- air-discount-scheme-backend
- air-discount-scheme-web
- api
- application-system-form
- contentful-apps
- contentful-entry-tagger-service
- download-service
- icelandic-names-registry-backend
- island-ui-storybook
- portals-admin
- service-portal
- services-documents
- services-sessions-cleanup
- services-sessions-worker
- skilavottord-web
- skilavottord-ws
- xroad-collector
🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
1-3400: Verify code owner coverage across all services.Let's verify that all relevant services have CODE_OWNER assignments.
Let me try a different approach to verify the CODE_OWNER coverage.
Let me try one more time with a modified script to get a clearer picture.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for services that might be missing CODE_OWNER environment variables # Expected: All services that handle requests should have CODE_OWNER defined # Find all service definitions and check for CODE_OWNER echo "Services without CODE_OWNER:" gawk ' /^[a-zA-Z0-9-]+:/ { service=$0; in_env=0 } /env:/ { in_env=1 } /CODE_OWNER:/ { if(in_env) has_owner[service]=1 } END { for(svc in has_owner) { if(!has_owner[svc]) print svc } } ' charts/islandis/values.prod.yamlLength of output: 311
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Find all services with env sections and check for CODE_OWNER echo "Services with env sections:" rg -A 1 "^[a-zA-Z0-9-]+:\n\s+enabled: true" charts/islandis/values.prod.yaml echo -e "\nServices with CODE_OWNER defined:" rg "CODE_OWNER:" charts/islandis/values.prod.yamlLength of output: 828
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Find all enabled services and their CODE_OWNER assignments echo "=== Enabled Services ===" awk '/^[a-zA-Z0-9-]+:/{service=$1} /enabled: true/{print service}' charts/islandis/values.prod.yaml echo -e "\n=== Services with CODE_OWNER ===" awk '/^[a-zA-Z0-9-]+:/{service=$1} /CODE_OWNER:/{print service " -> " $2}' charts/islandis/values.prod.yamlLength of output: 1617
charts/islandis/values.dev.yaml (1)
838-838: Consider documenting code ownership assignments.To improve maintainability and make ownership assignments more discoverable, consider:
- Adding comments explaining the ownership model
- Creating a central documentation of code ownership assignments
- Establishing a process for updating ownership information
Also applies to: 1003-1003, 1302-1302, 1693-1693, 1880-1880, 1977-1977, 2181-2181, 2317-2317, 2469-2469, 2697-2697, 3076-3076, 3181-3181, 3277-3277, 3391-3391
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (82)
apps/api/src/app/app.module.ts(3 hunks)apps/application-system/api/infra/application-system-api.ts(2 hunks)apps/auth-admin-web/infra/auth-admin-web.ts(2 hunks)apps/consultation-portal/infra/samradsgatt.ts(2 hunks)apps/services/auth/admin-api/infra/auth-admin-api.ts(2 hunks)apps/services/auth/delegation-api/infra/delegation-api.ts(2 hunks)apps/services/auth/ids-api/infra/ids-api.ts(2 hunks)apps/services/auth/public-api/infra/auth-public-api.ts(2 hunks)apps/services/bff/infra/admin-portal.infra.ts(2 hunks)apps/services/endorsements/api/infra/endorsement-system-api.ts(2 hunks)apps/services/form-system/infra/form-system.ts(1 hunks)apps/services/license-api/infra/license-api.ts(1 hunks)apps/services/regulations-admin-backend/infra/regulations-admin-backend.ts(2 hunks)apps/services/search-indexer/infra/search-indexer-service.ts(2 hunks)apps/services/sessions/infra/sessions.ts(2 hunks)apps/services/university-gateway/infra/university-gateway.ts(2 hunks)apps/services/user-notification/infra/user-notification.ts(4 hunks)apps/services/user-profile/infra/service-portal-api.ts(2 hunks)apps/web/infra/web.ts(1 hunks)charts/identity-server/values.dev.yaml(5 hunks)charts/identity-server/values.prod.yaml(5 hunks)charts/identity-server/values.staging.yaml(5 hunks)charts/islandis/values.dev.yaml(14 hunks)charts/islandis/values.prod.yaml(14 hunks)charts/islandis/values.staging.yaml(14 hunks)charts/services/application-system-api-worker/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/application-system-api-worker/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/application-system-api-worker/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/auth-admin-web/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/auth-admin-web/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/auth-admin-web/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/consultation-portal/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/consultation-portal/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/consultation-portal/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/endorsement-system-api/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/endorsement-system-api/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/endorsement-system-api/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/license-api/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/license-api/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/license-api/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/regulations-admin-backend/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/regulations-admin-backend/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/regulations-admin-backend/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/search-indexer-service/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/search-indexer-service/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/search-indexer-service/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/service-portal-api/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/service-portal-api/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/service-portal-api/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-auth-admin-api/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-auth-admin-api/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-auth-admin-api/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-auth-delegation-api/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-auth-delegation-api/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-auth-delegation-api/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-auth-ids-api/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-auth-ids-api/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-auth-ids-api/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-bff-portals-admin/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-bff-portals-admin/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-bff-portals-admin/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-sessions/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-sessions/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-sessions/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-university-gateway/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-university-gateway/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/services-university-gateway/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/user-notification-cleanup-worker/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/user-notification-cleanup-worker/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/user-notification-cleanup-worker/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/user-notification-worker/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/user-notification-worker/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/user-notification-worker/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/user-notification/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/user-notification/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/user-notification/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/web/values.dev.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/web/values.prod.yaml(1 hunks)charts/services/web/values.staging.yaml(1 hunks)
⛔ Files not processed due to max files limit (23)
- infra/src/dsl/dsl.ts
- libs/api/domains/application/src/lib/application.resolver.ts
- libs/api/domains/form-system/src/lib/forms/forms.resolver.ts
- libs/api/domains/form-system/src/lib/groups/groups.resolver.ts
- libs/api/domains/form-system/src/lib/inputs/inputs.resolver.ts
- libs/api/domains/form-system/src/lib/organizations/organizations.resolver.ts
- libs/api/domains/form-system/src/lib/services/services.resolver.ts
- libs/api/domains/form-system/src/lib/steps/steps.resolver.ts
- libs/api/domains/license-service/src/lib/resolvers/licenseCollection.resolver.ts
- libs/api/domains/license-service/src/lib/resolvers/pkPass.resolver.ts
- libs/api/domains/license-service/src/lib/resolvers/provider.resolver.ts
- libs/api/domains/license-service/src/lib/resolvers/userLicense.resolver.ts
- libs/logging/jest.config.ts
- libs/logging/src/index.ts
- libs/logging/src/lib/context.spec.ts
- libs/logging/src/lib/context.ts
- libs/logging/src/lib/logging.ts
- libs/nest/core/src/index.ts
- libs/nest/core/src/lib/code-owner/code-owner.decorator.ts
- libs/nest/core/src/lib/code-owner/code-owner.interceptor.spec.ts
- libs/nest/core/src/lib/code-owner/code-owner.interceptor.ts
- libs/shared/constants/src/index.ts
- libs/shared/constants/src/lib/codeOwners.ts
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (19)
apps/api/src/app/app.module.ts (1)
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/application-system/api/infra/application-system-api.ts (1)
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/auth-admin-web/infra/auth-admin-web.ts (1)
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/consultation-portal/infra/samradsgatt.ts (1)
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/services/auth/admin-api/infra/auth-admin-api.ts (2)
Pattern apps/services/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NestJS architecture, including modules, services, and controllers.
- Dependency injection patterns and service encapsulation.
- Integration and unit testing coverage and practices."
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/services/auth/delegation-api/infra/delegation-api.ts (2)
Pattern apps/services/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NestJS architecture, including modules, services, and controllers.
- Dependency injection patterns and service encapsulation.
- Integration and unit testing coverage and practices."
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/services/auth/ids-api/infra/ids-api.ts (2)
Pattern apps/services/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NestJS architecture, including modules, services, and controllers.
- Dependency injection patterns and service encapsulation.
- Integration and unit testing coverage and practices."
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/services/auth/public-api/infra/auth-public-api.ts (2)
Pattern apps/services/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NestJS architecture, including modules, services, and controllers.
- Dependency injection patterns and service encapsulation.
- Integration and unit testing coverage and practices."
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/services/bff/infra/admin-portal.infra.ts (2)
Pattern apps/services/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NestJS architecture, including modules, services, and controllers.
- Dependency injection patterns and service encapsulation.
- Integration and unit testing coverage and practices."
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/services/endorsements/api/infra/endorsement-system-api.ts (2)
Pattern apps/services/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NestJS architecture, including modules, services, and controllers.
- Dependency injection patterns and service encapsulation.
- Integration and unit testing coverage and practices."
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/services/form-system/infra/form-system.ts (2)
Pattern apps/services/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NestJS architecture, including modules, services, and controllers.
- Dependency injection patterns and service encapsulation.
- Integration and unit testing coverage and practices."
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/services/license-api/infra/license-api.ts (2)
Pattern apps/services/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NestJS architecture, including modules, services, and controllers.
- Dependency injection patterns and service encapsulation.
- Integration and unit testing coverage and practices."
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/services/regulations-admin-backend/infra/regulations-admin-backend.ts (2)
Pattern apps/services/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NestJS architecture, including modules, services, and controllers.
- Dependency injection patterns and service encapsulation.
- Integration and unit testing coverage and practices."
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/services/search-indexer/infra/search-indexer-service.ts (2)
Pattern apps/services/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NestJS architecture, including modules, services, and controllers.
- Dependency injection patterns and service encapsulation.
- Integration and unit testing coverage and practices."
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/services/sessions/infra/sessions.ts (2)
Pattern apps/services/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NestJS architecture, including modules, services, and controllers.
- Dependency injection patterns and service encapsulation.
- Integration and unit testing coverage and practices."
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/services/university-gateway/infra/university-gateway.ts (2)
Pattern apps/services/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NestJS architecture, including modules, services, and controllers.
- Dependency injection patterns and service encapsulation.
- Integration and unit testing coverage and practices."
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/services/user-notification/infra/user-notification.ts (2)
Pattern apps/services/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NestJS architecture, including modules, services, and controllers.
- Dependency injection patterns and service encapsulation.
- Integration and unit testing coverage and practices."
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/services/user-profile/infra/service-portal-api.ts (2)
Pattern apps/services/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NestJS architecture, including modules, services, and controllers.
- Dependency injection patterns and service encapsulation.
- Integration and unit testing coverage and practices."
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/web/infra/web.ts (1)
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
🔇 Additional comments (130)
apps/services/form-system/infra/form-system.ts (2)
1-5: LGTM! Clean import structure
The imports are well-organized and follow TypeScript best practices.
11-11: Verify code owner consistency across form-system components
The code owner configuration looks good and aligns with the PR objectives for tracking ownership. Let's verify that this ownership is consistently applied across related components.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner configuration is correctly set and isolated to the form-system service
The form-system service is correctly configured with Advania as the code owner in its infrastructure definition. This is the only place where code ownership needs to be defined for this service, as the other form-system related files are either:
- Client libraries (
libs/clients/form-system/) - API domain definitions (
libs/api/domains/form-system/) - Portal integrations (
libs/portals/admin/form-system/)
These supporting files inherit their ownership context from the main service definition.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify code owner consistency across form-system related files
# Expected: All form-system related services should have the same code owner
# Search for code owner configurations in form-system related files
echo "Checking code owner configurations in form-system related files:"
rg -l "form-system" | xargs rg "codeOwner.*Advania"
# Check for any potential inconsistencies in code ownership
echo "Checking for potential inconsistent code ownership:"
rg -l "form-system" | xargs rg "codeOwner" | grep -v "Advania"
Length of output: 444
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find all form-system related files and their code owners
# First, let's find all infrastructure files related to form-system
echo "=== Form System Infrastructure Files ==="
fd "form-system.*\.ts" infra/
# Now let's check for any code owner configurations in these files
echo -e "\n=== Code Owner Configurations ==="
fd "form-system.*\.ts" infra/ --exec rg -l "codeOwner"
# Let's also check the content of these files for code owner declarations
echo -e "\n=== Code Owner Details ==="
fd "form-system.*\.ts" infra/ --exec rg "codeOwner" {}
Length of output: 386
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try one more approach to find form-system related files and their code owners
# Search for form-system files in the entire repository
echo "=== Form System Files ==="
fd "form-system"
# Check for code owner configurations in the entire apps directory
echo -e "\n=== Code Owner Configurations in Apps ==="
rg "codeOwner" apps/
# Specifically look for form-system service configurations
echo -e "\n=== Form System Service Configurations ==="
rg -A 5 -B 5 "form-system" apps/ | rg -A 5 -B 5 "service|stack"
Length of output: 15566
apps/services/regulations-admin-backend/infra/regulations-admin-backend.ts (3)
1-5: LGTM! Clean import organization
The imports are well-organized, with infrastructure-related imports grouped together.
16-16: LGTM! Code owner specification aligns with PR objectives
The addition of .codeOwner(CodeOwners.Hugsmidjan) properly implements the code ownership tracking requirement.
Line range hint 1-47: Verify service configuration completeness
While the code ownership implementation looks good, let's verify that all necessary configurations are in place for proper service operation.
✅ Verification successful
Service configuration is properly set up
The verification shows that all essential configurations are in place:
- Identity server configuration is properly set with appropriate URLs for different environments
- Resource limits are correctly configured with CPU and memory constraints
- Code ownership is properly assigned to Hugsmidjan
- Service name and namespace are correctly defined
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify service configuration completeness and consistency
# Check if all required environment variables are properly configured in other services
rg -A 5 "IDENTITY_SERVER_ISSUER_URL|IDENTITY_SERVER_CLIENT_ID" "apps/services/**/infra/*.ts"
# Check for consistent resource limits across similar services
rg -A 3 "limits: \{ cpu: '400m', memory: '512Mi' \}" "apps/services/**/infra/*.ts"
# Verify code owner configuration in other regulation-related services
rg "CodeOwners\.Hugsmidjan" "apps/services/**/infra/*.ts"
Length of output: 455
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try with more precise path patterns and use fd to find the files first
# Find all infrastructure files
echo "=== Infrastructure Files ==="
fd -t f ".*\.ts$" apps/services
# Check environment variables configuration
echo -e "\n=== Environment Variables Check ==="
rg -A 5 "IDENTITY_SERVER_(ISSUER_URL|CLIENT_ID)" .
# Check resource limits
echo -e "\n=== Resource Limits Check ==="
rg -A 3 "limits:.+cpu:.+400m.+memory:.+512Mi" .
# Check code ownership
echo -e "\n=== Code Ownership Check ==="
rg "CodeOwners\.Hugsmidjan" .
Length of output: 131619
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check for resource limits and code ownership more specifically
# Check resource limits in the regulations-admin-backend service
echo "=== Resource Limits Check ==="
rg "limits:.+cpu:.+memory" apps/services/regulations-admin-backend/infra/
# Check code ownership in the regulations-admin-backend service
echo -e "\n=== Code Ownership Check ==="
rg "CodeOwners\." apps/services/regulations-admin-backend/infra/
# Check for similar services configuration
echo -e "\n=== Similar Services Configuration ==="
rg "service\('regulations-" apps/services/regulations-admin-backend/infra/
Length of output: 805
apps/services/endorsements/api/infra/endorsement-system-api.ts (2)
1-5: LGTM! Clean import addition
The CodeOwners import is properly added alongside existing DSL imports.
19-19: Verify code ownership assignment
The code owner is set to Juni, which aligns with the PR objectives to help DevOps identify responsible teams. However, let's verify this ownership assignment across environments.
✅ Verification successful
Code ownership configuration is consistent across environments
The verification confirms that:
- The code owner is correctly set to 'juni' across all environments (dev, staging, prod)
- The Juni code ownership is also consistently used in the user-notification service, indicating a pattern for Juni-owned services
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify consistent code ownership configuration across environments
# Expected: CODE_OWNER should be set to 'juni' in all environment files
# Check for code owner in environment-specific values files
echo "Checking code owner in values files:"
for env in dev staging prod; do
echo "Environment: $env"
rg -A 1 "CODE_OWNER:" "charts/services/endorsement-system-api/values.${env}.yaml"
done
# Check for other services potentially owned by Juni
echo -e "\nChecking for other Juni-owned services:"
rg -A 1 "CodeOwners.Juni" "apps/services/"
Length of output: 1572
charts/services/web/values.dev.yaml (2)
Line range hint 1-6: Verify the correct process for updating this file
The file header indicates that manual edits should be avoided and suggests running "yarn charts" instead. Please verify if this change should be made through the charts generation process rather than direct modification.
23-23: Document CODE_OWNER variable and its accepted values
The CODE_OWNER environment variable has been added with the value 'stefna'. Consider:
- Adding a comment explaining the purpose and impact of this variable
- Documenting the accepted values and format
- Evaluating if this should be parameterized across different environments
✅ Verification successful
Document CODE_OWNER variable and its accepted values
The CODE_OWNER environment variable is used for service ownership tracking and logging purposes. Here's the documentation:
-
Purpose: Identifies the team or organization responsible for maintaining a service, used in logging context and service metadata.
-
Accepted values (as defined in
CodeOwnersenum):- 'Advania'
- 'aranja'
- 'core'
- 'deloitte'
- 'devops'
- 'hugsmidjan'
- 'juni'
- 'kolibri-justice-league'
- 'kolibri-robin-hood'
- 'norda-applications'
- 'origo'
- 'programm'
- 'stefna'
-
The value 'stefna' is correctly set for this service, as it matches one of the valid enum values.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for CODE_OWNER usage and documentation across the codebase
# Look for other CODE_OWNER occurrences
echo "Checking for CODE_OWNER usage in values files:"
rg "CODE_OWNER" "charts/*/values*.yaml"
# Look for documentation
echo -e "\nChecking for documentation:"
fd -e md -e txt | rg -l "CODE_OWNER"
Length of output: 312
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader search to understand the context better
# First, let's see if we can find the charts directory structure
echo "Charts directory structure:"
fd . charts -t d
# Then look for all yaml files in charts
echo -e "\nYAML files in charts:"
fd -e yaml -e yml . charts
# Search for CODE_OWNER in all yaml files
echo -e "\nCODE_OWNER occurrences in yaml files:"
rg "CODE_OWNER" -A 2 -B 2
# Look for any potential documentation files
echo -e "\nPotential documentation files:"
fd README -e md
Length of output: 91125
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check for any documentation or code that explains the CODE_OWNER variable's purpose
# Search for CODE_OWNER in TypeScript/JavaScript files that might define or document it
echo "Searching for CODE_OWNER definition or documentation in code:"
rg -t ts -t js "CODE_OWNER" -B 3 -A 3
# Look for any enum or type definition that might list valid values
echo -e "\nSearching for CodeOwners type definition:"
ast-grep --pattern 'type CodeOwners = $$$'
ast-grep --pattern 'enum CodeOwners { $$$ }'
# Check for any configuration documentation
echo -e "\nChecking configuration documentation:"
rg -t md "CODE_OWNER"
Length of output: 6312
charts/services/services-sessions/values.dev.yaml (1)
22-22: Verify the code owner assignment
The hardcoded value 'aranja' has been assigned as the code owner for the sessions service. This aligns with the PR's objective of adding code ownership for better log tracking.
Let's verify if this assignment is consistent with other services and documentation:
✅ Verification successful
Code owner assignment is consistent with documentation and other services
The assignment of 'aranja' as the code owner for the sessions service is verified and correct based on:
- The sessions service README.md explicitly lists Aranja as the code owner
- The CODE_OWNER value 'aranja' is consistently set across all environments (dev/staging/prod) for the sessions service
- Aranja is also the code owner for related auth and API services in the codebase, showing a logical grouping of ownership
- The assignment follows the established pattern of code ownership declarations seen across other services
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check code owner assignments across services and documentation
# Look for any documentation about code ownership
fd README.md | xargs rg -i "code.*owner|team.*owner|aranja"
# Check if other services have similar code owner assignments
fd "values\..*\.yaml$" charts/services | xargs rg "CODE_OWNER:"
Length of output: 11606
charts/services/services-sessions/values.staging.yaml (1)
Line range hint 1-6: Verify the chart generation process
The file header indicates this is an auto-generated file. Please ensure the CODE_OWNER value is properly configured in the source templates used by the "yarn charts" command.
charts/services/auth-admin-web/values.prod.yaml (2)
23-23: Verify code owner value consistency across services
The code owner value 'aranja' should be consistent with the team ownership model. Let's verify this value across other services.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner value 'aranja' is consistent with the team ownership model
The verification shows that 'aranja' is consistently set as the CODE_OWNER across all auth-related services and components:
- auth-admin-web
- services-auth-admin-api
- services-auth-public-api
- services-auth-ids-api
- services-auth-delegation-api
- services-sessions
- identity-server components
This indicates proper alignment with the team ownership model where Aranja is responsible for authentication-related services.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check CODE_OWNER values across all Helm chart values files
fd -t f "values.*yaml" -x grep -l "CODE_OWNER" | xargs awk '/CODE_OWNER:/ {print FILENAME ":" $0}'
Length of output: 8328
Line range hint 1-6: Warning: This file is automatically generated
The file header explicitly states not to edit this file manually and instructs to run "yarn charts" instead. Please ensure that your changes are made through the appropriate source files that generate this configuration.
Let's verify the source of this configuration:
charts/services/services-sessions/values.prod.yaml (1)
22-22: LGTM! Verify consistency across services.
The addition of CODE_OWNER environment variable aligns with the logging context enhancement initiative.
Let's verify the consistency of code ownership across other service configurations:
✅ Verification successful
Code ownership value is consistent across environments
The CODE_OWNER value 'aranja' is consistently set across all three environments (dev, staging, and prod) in the services-sessions service, which demonstrates proper configuration alignment.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER values across all service configurations
# Expected: All related services should have consistent code ownership defined
# Search for CODE_OWNER in all yaml files under charts/services
rg "CODE_OWNER:" "charts/services/**/*.yaml"
Length of output: 110
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach using fd to find yaml files first
fd -e yaml -e yml . charts/services/ --exec rg -l "CODE_OWNER:"
# If no files are found, let's check if the directory structure exists
fd . charts/services/
Length of output: 14101
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the actual content of CODE_OWNER in the files where it exists
rg "CODE_OWNER:" -A 1 charts/services/services-sessions/values.prod.yaml charts/services/services-sessions/values.staging.yaml charts/services/services-sessions/values.dev.yaml
Length of output: 693
apps/services/bff/infra/admin-portal.infra.ts (2)
1-7: Verify module boundary exception necessity
The eslint-disable @nx/enforce-module-boundaries comment suggests we're importing from outside the module boundaries. Let's verify if this exception is necessary.
✅ Verification successful
Module boundary exception is correctly applied
The eslint disable comment for module boundaries is justified because:
- The
CodeOwnerstype is primarily defined inlibs/shared/constantsbut is re-exported through the infrastructure DSL ininfra/src/dsl/dsl.ts - Other services (e.g., auth-admin-web) follow the same pattern of importing
CodeOwnersfrom the infrastructure DSL - This is a deliberate architectural decision to centralize infrastructure configuration through the DSL module
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if other files in the same directory follow similar import patterns
rg -g "*.ts" -l "enforce-module-boundaries" "apps/services/bff/infra/"
# Check if we can import from a closer module
fd -e ts -x grep -l "CodeOwners" {} \; apps/services/bff/
Length of output: 553
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if other files in the same directory follow similar import patterns
rg -g "*.ts" -l "enforce-module-boundaries" .
# Check the import pattern of CodeOwners in the codebase
rg -g "*.ts" "import.*CodeOwners" -A 1
# Check if there's a closer location to import CodeOwners from
fd -e ts . | xargs grep -l "export.*CodeOwners"
Length of output: 4410
21-21: LGTM! Code ownership assignment aligns with PR objectives
The .codeOwner(CodeOwners.Core) assignment is correctly implemented and aligns with the PR's goal of introducing code ownership context for better log tracking and team accountability.
✅ Verification successful
Code ownership assignment is correctly implemented and consistent with the codebase patterns
The assignment of CodeOwners.Core to the admin-portal BFF service is appropriate and follows the established pattern in the codebase. The verification shows that:
- The
CodeOwnersenum is properly defined inlibs/shared/constants/src/lib/codeOwners.ts - Other services consistently use the
.codeOwner()method with appropriate team assignments - There are no conflicting ownership assignments for this service
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Verify consistent code ownership assignment across BFF services
ast-grep --pattern 'service($name)
.$$$
.codeOwner($owner)
.$$$'
# Check for any potential conflicting code owner assignments
rg "CodeOwners\.Core" "apps/services/bff/"
Length of output: 193
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for all code owner assignments in the BFF services
rg "\.codeOwner\(" apps/services/bff/ -A 1 -B 1
# Check the definition and usage of CodeOwners enum
fd "CodeOwners" --exec cat {}
Length of output: 284
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for CodeOwners enum definition in the entire codebase
ast-grep --pattern 'enum CodeOwners {
$$$
}'
# Look for other services with code ownership assignments
rg "\.codeOwner\(" --type ts
Length of output: 2910
charts/services/web/values.staging.yaml (2)
24-24: Consider parameterizing the CODE_OWNER value
The hardcoded value 'stefna' might need to vary across different environments or services. Consider making this configurable through a template variable or external configuration.
Line range hint 1-6:
The file header indicates that this is an automatically generated file. Changes should be made through the source configuration and regenerated using "yarn charts" instead of direct edits.
✅ Verification successful
The verification confirms that this file is indeed automatically generated. The changes should be made through the infrastructure configuration in the infra/ directory, specifically:
- The chart values are generated via the
yarn chartscommand which runs from theinfra/directory - The generation logic is handled by files in
infra/src/dsl/andinfra/src/cli/ - The
CODE_OWNERenvironment variable should be configured in the source configuration rather than directly in the generated files
Please make the changes in the appropriate source configuration and regenerate using yarn charts.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if there's a source template or configuration that generates this file
fd -g "*web*.yaml.template" -g "*web*.yaml.gotmpl" -g "*web*.yaml.j2"
Length of output: 236
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader search for potential template files and chart configuration
fd -e yaml -e yml -e template -e gotmpl -e j2 . charts/services/web/
# Also check for any scripts or configuration that might be responsible for chart generation
fd -g "*chart*" -g "*helm*" -g "package.json" -t f
Length of output: 387
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the package.json in the root for any chart-related scripts
rg "charts" package.json -A 2 -B 2
# Let's also check the content of related environment files to understand the pattern
cat charts/services/web/values.{dev,prod}.yaml
Length of output: 5082
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the infra directory since the charts script runs from there
fd . infra/ -t f -e json -e yaml -e js
# Also check for any chart generation related files
rg -g "*.{js,ts}" "charts" infra/ -l
Length of output: 3559
apps/web/infra/web.ts (2)
1-7: LGTM! Clean import addition
The CodeOwners import is properly added alongside existing DSL imports.
14-14: LGTM! Code owner specification aligns with PR objectives
The .codeOwner(CodeOwners.Stefna) addition correctly implements the code ownership feature, matching the PR's goal of associating services with specific teams.
charts/services/web/values.prod.yaml (1)
23-23: Verify code owner value consistency
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'stefna' aligns with the PR objectives for logging ownership. However, let's verify this value is consistent across environments and matches the intended ownership structure.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner value 'stefna' is consistent and correctly configured
The verification shows that the CODE_OWNER: 'stefna' value is:
- Consistent across all environments (dev, staging, prod) for the web service
- Matches the ownership structure in the islandis chart values where 'stefna' is also referenced
- Aligns with other services that follow the same pattern of team ownership (e.g., 'aranja', 'juni', 'core')
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER values across different environments and services
# to ensure consistency in the ownership structure
echo "Checking CODE_OWNER values across environments for web service:"
fd --type f "values.*\.yaml$" charts/services/web/ --exec grep -H "CODE_OWNER:"
echo -e "\nChecking all CODE_OWNER declarations in chart values:"
fd --type f "values.*\.yaml$" charts/ --exec grep -H "CODE_OWNER:"
Length of output: 8590
charts/services/consultation-portal/values.dev.yaml (2)
25-25: Consider a more maintainable approach for code ownership configuration
While adding CODE_OWNER aligns with the PR objectives for logging context, hardcoding the value in environment-specific files might make it difficult to maintain as the number of services grows. Consider:
- Centralizing code ownership configuration
- Using a shared configuration file or service
- Implementing validation for allowed code owner values
Line range hint 1-6: Verify the correct process for updating auto-generated files
The file header indicates this is an auto-generated file that should not be edited manually. Please ensure you're following the correct process by running yarn charts to generate these changes.
charts/services/consultation-portal/values.staging.yaml (1)
Line range hint 1-6:
The file header indicates that manual edits should be avoided and the file should be generated using "yarn charts". Please ensure this change is being made through the appropriate generation process rather than direct modification.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the charts generation process.
Let me check the infra directory's package.json to understand the charts generation process better.
Let me check the chart generation CLI script to understand the complete process.
Let me check the islandis.ts file since it contains the consultation-portal configuration.
The verification confirms that the values files are automatically generated through the proper infrastructure setup. The file should not be edited manually, instead:
- The consultation-portal service is configured in
infra/src/uber-charts/islandis.ts - The values files are generated using
yarn chartscommand which runs the generation script - The generation script automatically adds the warning header to prevent manual edits
To make changes to the values file:
- Modify the service configuration in the infrastructure code
- Run
yarn chartsto regenerate all values files
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if there's a charts generation script
fd -g "*charts*.{js,ts,sh}" -x echo "Found charts script: {}"
Length of output: 390
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the content of the chart generation related scripts
echo "=== Checking chart generation script ==="
cat infra/scripts/ci/diff-chart-values-all-charts.sh
echo -e "\n=== Checking for yarn scripts related to charts ==="
cat package.json | jq -r '.scripts | with_entries(select(.key | contains("chart")))'
Length of output: 800
Script:
#!/bin/bash
echo "=== Checking infra/package.json for charts script ==="
cat infra/package.json | jq -r '.scripts | with_entries(select(.key | contains("chart")))'
echo -e "\n=== Checking for chart generation source files ==="
cat infra/src/uber-charts/all-charts.ts
Length of output: 1451
Script:
#!/bin/bash
echo "=== Checking chart generation CLI script ==="
cat infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts
echo -e "\n=== Looking for consultation-portal service configuration ==="
rg -l "consultation-portal" infra/src/uber-charts/
Length of output: 2874
Script:
#!/bin/bash
echo "=== Checking islandis.ts for consultation-portal configuration ==="
cat infra/src/uber-charts/islandis.ts
echo -e "\n=== Checking if values file is generated ==="
ls -l charts/services/consultation-portal/values.staging.yaml
Length of output: 9599
apps/auth-admin-web/infra/auth-admin-web.ts (2)
1-1: LGTM: Clean import with proper type safety
The import statement follows TypeScript best practices by explicitly importing named exports and using proper type information from the DSL module.
15-15: Verify code owner configuration across environments
The code owner assignment aligns with the PR objectives for tracking service ownership. However, we should verify that this configuration is consistently reflected in the corresponding environment-specific values files.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner configuration is consistent across all environments
The verification confirms that the CODE_OWNER value is consistently set to 'aranja' across all environment files (dev, staging, and prod) in the identity-server charts. This aligns perfectly with the code owner configuration in the PR.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify code owner configuration consistency across environment files
# Expected: CODE_OWNER should be set to 'aranja' in all environment value files
echo "Checking code owner configuration in environment files..."
fd -e yaml -e yml values ./charts/identity-server/ -x grep -l "CODE_OWNER.*aranja" {} \;
Length of output: 346
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's verify the actual content of these files to ensure the values are consistent
echo "Content of values.staging.yaml:"
cat ./charts/identity-server/values.staging.yaml | grep -A 2 "CODE_OWNER"
echo -e "\nContent of values.prod.yaml:"
cat ./charts/identity-server/values.prod.yaml | grep -A 2 "CODE_OWNER"
echo -e "\nContent of values.dev.yaml:"
cat ./charts/identity-server/values.dev.yaml | grep -A 2 "CODE_OWNER"
# Also let's check if there are any other environment files we might have missed
echo -e "\nListing all values files in the directory:"
fd -e yaml -e yml values ./charts/identity-server/
Length of output: 3697
charts/services/consultation-portal/values.prod.yaml (1)
25-25: Verify code owner consistency across environments
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'Advania' aligns with the PR objectives for tracking responsible teams. However, we should verify this value is consistent across environments and matches the intended ownership structure.
✅ Verification successful
CODE_OWNER value is consistent across environments
The verification shows that 'Advania' is consistently set as the CODE_OWNER across all environments (dev, staging, and prod) for the consultation-portal service. This is aligned with the established pattern where each service maintains consistent ownership across all environments, as seen with other services like 'stefna' for web service, 'juni' for user-notification services, etc.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER consistency across different environment files and services
# Check CODE_OWNER values across all value files for this service
echo "Checking consultation-portal CODE_OWNER across environments:"
fd "values.*\.yaml" charts/services/consultation-portal -x grep -H "CODE_OWNER:"
# Check CODE_OWNER values across other services for potential inconsistencies
echo -e "\nChecking CODE_OWNER values in other services:"
fd "values.*\.yaml" charts/services -x grep -H "CODE_OWNER:"
Length of output: 5135
charts/services/auth-admin-web/values.dev.yaml (2)
23-23: Verify code ownership assignment
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'aranja' aligns with the PR objectives for logging enhancement and code ownership tracking. However, let's verify this is consistent across related auth services.
✅ Verification successful
Code ownership is consistent across auth services
The verification confirms that the CODE_OWNER: 'aranja' assignment is consistent across all auth-related services:
- auth-admin-web
- services-auth-admin-api
- services-auth-delegation-api
- services-auth-ids-api
- services-auth-public-api
All these services have CODE_OWNER: 'aranja' set consistently across their dev, staging, and prod environments.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER consistency across auth services
# Expected: All related auth services should have consistent ownership
# Search for CODE_OWNER in all auth service value files
fd -t f "values.*\.yaml$" charts/services/auth- --exec grep -l "CODE_OWNER"
# Check the actual values
fd -t f "values.*\.yaml$" charts/services/auth- --exec grep -A 1 -B 1 "CODE_OWNER"
Length of output: 376
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's first check the actual directory structure for auth services
fd -t d "auth" charts/services
# Then search for CODE_OWNER in all yaml files under charts/services
fd -t f "values.*\.yaml$" charts/services --exec grep -H "CODE_OWNER"
Length of output: 4987
Line range hint 1-6: Verify the chart generation process
This file is automatically generated. Please ensure you've run yarn charts to generate this change rather than editing it manually.
✅ Verification successful
Follow the automated chart generation process
The file is indeed automatically generated through the yarn charts command, which runs a sophisticated generation process in the infra/ directory. The warning comment is correct and matches the generation script's header. Any changes to this file should be made through the chart generation process by:
- Making changes to the chart configuration in the
infra/directory - Running
yarn chartsto regenerate all chart values files
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if there are any uncommitted changes after running yarn charts
# to verify the change was properly generated
# Check if yarn charts command exists in package.json scripts
cat package.json | jq -r '.scripts | select(.charts != null)'
# Look for any chart generation related files
fd -t f "values.template" charts/
Length of output: 2312
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the infra directory since the charts command is executed there
fd -t f "values.template" infra/
# Also check for any chart generation scripts
fd -t f -e js -e ts "chart" infra/
Length of output: 172
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the chart generation script to understand the process
cat infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts
# Also check for any template files that might be used for generation
fd -t f -e yaml "template" infra/
Length of output: 2585
apps/consultation-portal/infra/samradsgatt.ts (2)
1-7: LGTM: Clean import organization
The addition of CodeOwners import is well-organized with other DSL imports.
15-15: Verify code ownership configuration consistency
The code owner configuration looks correct, but let's verify it matches other service configurations and environment variables.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner configuration is correctly set
The code ownership configuration for the consultation portal service is consistent with the codebase patterns. The search results confirm:
- The
CodeOwnersenum is properly defined in the shared constants withAdvaniaas a valid option - Other services follow the same pattern of using
.codeOwner(CodeOwners.*)in their infrastructure configurations - The assignment of Advania as the code owner aligns with the established pattern
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify code ownership configuration consistency
# Check if the CODE_OWNER environment variable is properly set in Kubernetes values
fd "values.*\.yaml" charts/consultation-portal -x grep -l "CODE_OWNER"
# Check for consistent code ownership pattern across other services
ast-grep --pattern 'codeOwner(CodeOwners.$_)'
Length of output: 232
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader search for code ownership patterns and values files
# Search for any files containing CodeOwners
rg -l "CodeOwners\." --type ts
# Search for any values.yaml files in the repository
fd "values.*\.yaml$"
# Search for any environment variables related to code ownership
rg -l "CODE_OWNER"
# Look for code owner related configurations
ast-grep --pattern 'class CodeOwners'
Length of output: 14672
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's look for the CodeOwners enum definition and its usage pattern
# Find the CodeOwners enum definition
rg -A 5 "enum CodeOwners" --type ts
# Look for other codeOwner configurations in infrastructure files
rg "codeOwner\(CodeOwners\." --type ts -A 1
Length of output: 3643
charts/services/auth-admin-web/values.staging.yaml (2)
23-23: Consider a more flexible approach to code ownership configuration
While adding CODE_OWNER: 'aranja' aligns with the logging context enhancement, hardcoding the value in environment-specific files might create maintenance challenges:
- Changes would require updates across multiple environment files
- It might be better to derive this from a central configuration or service registry
- Consider implementing a dynamic lookup system for code ownership
Let's check for consistency across environments:
Line range hint 1-6:
The file header explicitly states not to edit manually and instructs to "Run 'yarn charts' instead". Please ensure this change is made through the appropriate source configuration that generates these files.
Let's verify the chart generation setup:
charts/services/user-notification-cleanup-worker/values.staging.yaml (1)
28-28: Verify logging context integration
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'juni' aligns with the PR's objective of enhancing logging capabilities. However, ensure that:
- The value 'juni' is the correct team identifier
- This service is properly integrated with the new logging context system
✅ Verification successful
CODE_OWNER value is consistent across services
The value 'juni' is consistently used as the CODE_OWNER across all related user notification services in all environments (dev, staging, prod), confirming this is the correct team identifier. Since this is a configuration value used across multiple services in the same domain, its consistency indicates it's the established team identifier.
While we couldn't directly verify the logging context integration due to source code not being accessible in the sandbox environment, the consistent usage of CODE_OWNER in the configuration suggests this is part of a standardized logging setup.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check consistency of CODE_OWNER across related services and verify logging integration
# Check for CODE_OWNER in related services
echo "Checking CODE_OWNER in related services..."
fd -e yaml -e yml . charts/services/user-notification* -x grep -l "CODE_OWNER" {} \; -exec grep "CODE_OWNER" {} \;
# Check for logging context integration
echo "Checking logging context integration..."
rg -l "withLoggingContext|CodeOwnerInterceptor" src/
Length of output: 1227
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to check CODE_OWNER values and logging integration
# Check CODE_OWNER values across all yaml files in the specified directories
echo "Checking CODE_OWNER values across services:"
find charts/services/user-notification* -type f -name "*.yaml" -o -name "*.yml" | xargs grep "CODE_OWNER:"
# Look for logging-related configurations
echo -e "\nChecking logging configurations:"
find charts/services/user-notification* -type f -name "*.yaml" -o -name "*.yml" | xargs grep -l "logging"
# Check for any logging context or interceptor patterns in the entire codebase
echo -e "\nChecking for logging context patterns:"
rg "logging|LoggingContext|CodeOwner" --type-add 'yaml:*.{yaml,yml}' -t yaml
Length of output: 1460
charts/services/user-notification-cleanup-worker/values.dev.yaml (1)
28-28: LGTM! Consider adding code owner validation.
The addition of CODE_OWNER aligns with the PR objectives for better log tracking and team accountability.
Let's verify consistency across environments and related services:
✅ Verification successful
CODE_OWNER value is consistent across environments and related services
The verification shows that:
- The CODE_OWNER value 'juni' is consistently set across all environments (dev/staging/prod) for:
- user-notification-cleanup-worker
- user-notification-worker
- user-notification
- Other services in the codebase also follow the same pattern of consistent CODE_OWNER values across environments
- 'juni' appears to be a valid code owner value as it's used in other services like endorsement-system-api
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for CODE_OWNER consistency across environments and related services
echo "Checking CODE_OWNER across environments..."
rg "CODE_OWNER:" "charts/services/user-notification*/*.yaml"
Length of output: 237
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's first find the correct paths for the service
echo "Finding yaml files in charts/services..."
fd -e yaml . charts/services/
# Then check for CODE_OWNER across all yaml files
echo -e "\nChecking CODE_OWNER across all yaml files..."
rg "CODE_OWNER:" charts/services/
Length of output: 13483
charts/services/user-notification-cleanup-worker/values.prod.yaml (1)
28-28: LGTM! The CODE_OWNER environment variable is properly configured.
The addition aligns with the PR objectives to support logging context and code ownership tracking.
Let's verify consistency of code ownership across related services:
apps/services/sessions/infra/sessions.ts (1)
1-7: LGTM! Clean import organization
The addition of CodeOwners import is well-organized with other DSL imports.
apps/services/user-profile/infra/service-portal-api.ts (2)
1-6: LGTM! Clean import structure.
The addition of CodeOwners import is well-organized within the existing import structure.
71-71: LGTM! Code owner specification aligns with logging enhancement goals.
The addition of .codeOwner(CodeOwners.Aranja) properly implements the code ownership feature as intended in the PR objectives. This will help DevOps teams identify responsible teams for logs and issues.
Let's verify the consistency of code ownership across related services:
✅ Verification successful
Code ownership configuration is correctly applied and consistent with team assignments
The verification shows that:
- The
.codeOwner(CodeOwners.Aranja)assignment for the user-profile service aligns with other Aranja-owned services (auth APIs, sessions) - The CodeOwners enum is properly defined in
libs/shared/constants/src/lib/codeOwners.ts - Each service has exactly one code owner specified
- The ownership pattern follows the established structure across all services
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify code ownership configuration across related services
# Expected: Consistent code ownership patterns across service configurations
# Search for code owner configurations in related service files
echo "Checking code owner configurations in service files..."
rg -A 1 "\.codeOwner\(" "apps/services/"
# Verify CodeOwners enum usage
echo "Checking CodeOwners enum definition..."
ast-grep --pattern 'enum CodeOwners {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 3973
apps/services/license-api/infra/license-api.ts (2)
1-13: LGTM! Import changes look good.
The addition of CodeOwners import and reordering of xroad imports maintain clean code organization while supporting the new code ownership feature.
Line range hint 24-68: Verify secret management for new logging context.
The service properly manages sensitive configurations through secrets. However, with the addition of code ownership and logging context, verify if any new sensitive information needs to be added to the secrets configuration.
✅ Verification successful
No additional secrets configuration needed for logging context
The service already has proper logging configuration through the @island.is/logging package and code ownership is correctly set via CodeOwners.Hugsmidjan. The logging implementation uses dependency injection and doesn't require additional environment variables or secrets. Request IDs for logging are handled through DTOs and the standard logging module configuration.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if any new environment variables or secrets related to logging/code ownership
# have been added in other services that might be needed here
# Search for new logging-related environment variables
rg -g '*.ts' -g '*.yaml' 'CODE_OWNER|LOGGING_CONTEXT' ./apps/services/
# Search for new logging-related secrets
rg -g '*.ts' -g '*.yaml' '/k8s/.*LOG|/k8s/.*CODE' ./apps/services/
Length of output: 245
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check for any logging or code ownership related configurations in the codebase
# to ensure we haven't missed anything
# Search for logging context or code ownership in configuration files
rg -g '*.ts' -g '*.yaml' -g '*.json' -B 3 -A 3 'logging|codeOwner|context' ./apps/services/license-api/
# Check for any environment variables related to logging in the service
rg -g '*.ts' -g '*.yaml' -g '*.env' 'process.env.*LOG|process.env.*CONTEXT|process.env.*OWNER' ./apps/services/license-api/
Length of output: 7225
apps/services/university-gateway/infra/university-gateway.ts (2)
1-5: LGTM! Clean import addition
The CodeOwners import is properly grouped with other DSL imports.
28-28: Verify code owner assignment
Let's verify if Origo is consistently assigned as the code owner for university-related services.
✅ Verification successful
Let me search for more university-related services and their code owners to ensure we have a complete picture.
Let me search for code owners in other infrastructure files to get a complete picture of ownership patterns.
Code owner assignment is appropriate
The university-gateway service is correctly assigned to CodeOwners.Origo. Looking at the infrastructure files across the codebase, we can see that different teams own different services based on their domain expertise. Origo appears to be the only owner of university-related services, making this assignment consistent with the codebase's ownership patterns.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for code owner assignments in other university-related services
rg -l "university" apps/services/ | xargs rg "CodeOwners\." -A 1 -B 1
Length of output: 328
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for all university-related files in the codebase
fd university
# Then search for code owner assignments in those files
fd university | xargs rg "CodeOwners\." -A 1 -B 1
Length of output: 9179
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for code owner assignments in infrastructure files
fd "infra" | xargs rg "CodeOwners\." -A 1 -B 1
Length of output: 5121
charts/services/regulations-admin-backend/values.dev.yaml (1)
22-22: LGTM: Code owner configuration aligns with PR objectives
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'hugsmidjan' environment variable is consistent with the PR's goal of implementing code ownership tracking. This will help DevOps teams identify responsible teams for specific applications and errors.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner configuration is consistently set across environments and services
The verification confirms that the CODE_OWNER: 'hugsmidjan' configuration is uniformly applied across:
- All environments (dev, staging, prod) for regulations-admin-backend
- All environments for license-api
- All environments for islandis (with duplicate entries)
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify consistent code owner values across other service configurations
rg "CODE_OWNER.*hugsmidjan" --type yaml
Length of output: 895
charts/services/regulations-admin-backend/values.prod.yaml (2)
22-22: Verify code owner consistency across services
The code owner is set to 'hugsmidjan'. Let's verify this aligns with other services and environments.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner 'hugsmidjan' is consistent across environments
The code owner value 'hugsmidjan' is correctly set and consistent across all environments (dev, staging, prod) for the regulations-admin-backend service. This matches with other services owned by hugsmidjan, such as the license-api service.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER values across all chart files
# Look for CODE_OWNER definitions in all chart files
rg -A 1 "CODE_OWNER:" "charts/"
Length of output: 21394
Line range hint 1-6: Ensure changes are made through the proper workflow
The file header indicates it should not be edited manually. Please verify that these changes were made through the "yarn charts" command rather than direct file modification.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the chart generation process.
Let me try one more verification to find the chart generation implementation.
Changes should be made through the yarn charts command
Based on the package.json findings, there is a proper workflow in place for generating chart values using the yarn charts command, which executes the chart generation script. Since this file is marked as automatically generated, any changes should be made through the source configuration and regenerated using this command rather than editing the values.yaml file directly.
- The warning comment in the file is valid and supported by the infrastructure setup
- The
yarn chartscommand is properly configured in both root and infra package.json files - Direct edits to the generated values.yaml files should be avoided
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if there are any chart generation scripts that should be run
# Look for chart generation scripts or configuration
fd -t f "chart" -E "*.yaml" -E "*.yml"
Length of output: 2983
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for chart generation related scripts in package.json
rg "charts\":" package.json -A 5
# Look for the actual chart generation implementation
rg -g "*.ts" -g "*.js" "generate.*chart" infra/src
Length of output: 502
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the infra directory for chart-related scripts and their content
cd infra && cat package.json
# Also check the chart generation script directly
cat infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts
Length of output: 1311
charts/services/regulations-admin-backend/values.staging.yaml (2)
22-22: Verify code owner assignment consistency
The code owner 'hugsmidjan' has been assigned to this service. This aligns with the PR objective of helping DevOps identify responsible teams for logs and errors.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner assignment is consistent with the codebase
The code owner 'hugsmidjan' assigned to the regulations-admin-backend service is consistent with:
- The service's infrastructure code in
apps/services/regulations-admin-backend/infra/regulations-admin-backend.tswhich sets the same code owner - Other services owned by hugsmidjan like license-api
- The overall code ownership structure defined in
libs/shared/constants/src/lib/codeOwners.ts
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for consistency in CODE_OWNER assignments across staging values files
fd -g 'values.staging.yaml' charts/services/ --exec grep -H "CODE_OWNER:" {} \;
# Look for any documentation about code ownership assignments
rg -i "code.?owner" -g '!*.yaml'
Length of output: 18812
Line range hint 1-7: Ensure changes are made through the proper workflow
The file header indicates this is an automatically generated file that should not be edited manually. Please verify that the changes were made through the yarn charts command rather than direct file modification.
charts/services/services-bff-portals-admin/values.prod.yaml (2)
33-33: LGTM! Code ownership configuration aligns with logging enhancement goals.
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'core' properly configures the service for the new logging context feature, enabling DevOps to track logs by team ownership.
33-33: Verify code ownership consistency across related services.
Let's ensure the code ownership configuration is consistent across related BFF services.
✅ Verification successful
Code ownership configuration is consistent across environments
The verification shows that the CODE_OWNER value 'core' is consistently set across all environments (dev, staging, prod) for the services-bff-portals-admin service. Looking at other BFF-related services in the codebase, we can see that each service has its designated code owner consistently set across all environments, which appears to be the intended design pattern.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER configuration across all BFF service values files
# Expected: All BFF services should have CODE_OWNER defined
# Search for CODE_OWNER in all values files under charts/services
fd --type f "values.*\.yaml$" charts/services | xargs grep -l "CODE_OWNER" || echo "No CODE_OWNER found"
# Show the actual values for comparison
fd --type f "values.*\.yaml$" charts/services | xargs grep "CODE_OWNER" || echo "No CODE_OWNER configurations found"
Length of output: 7851
charts/services/services-bff-portals-admin/values.dev.yaml (2)
33-33: Verify code ownership consistency across related services
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'core' aligns with the PR objectives. However, let's verify that this ownership assignment is consistent with related admin portal services.
✅ Verification successful
Code ownership assignment is consistent across environments
The verification shows that the CODE_OWNER: 'core' setting is consistently applied across all environments (dev, staging, prod) for the services-bff-portals-admin service. Other admin-related services have their own consistent ownership assignments:
auth-admin-webandservices-auth-admin-apiare owned by 'aranja'regulations-admin-backendis owned by 'hugsmidjan'
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER values across related admin portal services
# Look for other admin-related services and their code owner values
# Search for CODE_OWNER in other admin-related service configurations
rg -l "portals-admin|admin-api|admin-web" charts/ | xargs rg "CODE_OWNER:"
Length of output: 4515
Line range hint 1-6:
The file header indicates this is an automatically generated file. Any manual changes might be overwritten when running "yarn charts". Consider updating the source configuration instead.
✅ Verification successful
The warning about manual edits is valid. The file is automatically generated through the yarn charts command, which executes generate-chart-values.ts. The CODE_OWNER value 'core' is consistently set across all environments (dev/staging/prod) for the services-bff-portals-admin service, and this pattern of team-based ownership is consistently applied across all services in the charts directory.
To make changes:
- Modify the chart generation source code in
src/cli/generate-chart-values.tsinstead of editing the values files directly - Run
yarn chartsto regenerate the values files
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if there's a source template or configuration that generates this file
# Look for potential chart template files or configuration sources
fd -t f "values.dev.yaml.template" charts/services
fd -t f "values.template.yaml" charts/services
Length of output: 97
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check for any build/generation scripts that might be responsible for generating these values files
fd -t f "package.json" . | xargs rg -l "charts"
# Also look for any potential chart generation or templating scripts
fd -t f -e js -e ts | xargs rg -l "charts.*values.*yaml"
# Check if there are similar CODE_OWNER entries in other value files
rg "CODE_OWNER" charts/
Length of output: 8166
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the package.json files we found for chart generation scripts
cat ./infra/package.json ./package.json | jq -r '.scripts | to_entries | .[] | select(.key | contains("chart"))'
# Also check for any chart generation tools or configuration
fd -t f -e yaml -e yml | xargs rg -l "helm-config|chart-config"
Length of output: 335
charts/services/services-bff-portals-admin/values.staging.yaml (1)
33-33: Verify CODE_OWNER consistency across environments
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'core' aligns with the PR objectives for better log tracking. However, we should ensure this configuration is consistent across all environment files.
✅ Verification successful
CODE_OWNER is consistently set across environments
The verification confirms that CODE_OWNER: 'core' is consistently configured across all environment files (dev, staging, and prod) for the services-bff-portals-admin service, which aligns with the PR objectives for consistent log tracking.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if CODE_OWNER is consistently set across all environment files for this service
# Expected: Should find CODE_OWNER in dev, staging, and prod value files
fd "values\.(dev|prod|staging)\.yaml$" charts/services/services-bff-portals-admin/ --exec rg "CODE_OWNER:" {}
Length of output: 174
apps/services/auth/delegation-api/infra/delegation-api.ts (2)
2-2: LGTM: Clean import addition
The CodeOwners import is properly structured and follows the existing import pattern.
33-33: Verify code owner assignment
The code owner assignment to Aranja aligns with the PR objectives. However, let's verify this is consistent across related auth services.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner assignment is consistent across auth services
All auth services under apps/services/auth/ are consistently configured with CodeOwners.Aranja as the code owner:
- auth-public-api
- delegation-api
- ids-api
- auth-admin-api
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify consistent code owner assignment across auth services
# Expected: All auth services should have the same code owner
# Search for code owner assignments in auth service configurations
echo "Checking code owner consistency across auth services..."
rg -l "CodeOwners" apps/services/auth/ | while read -r file; do
echo "=== $file ==="
rg "codeOwner\(CodeOwners" "$file" -A 1 -B 1
done
Length of output: 1435
apps/services/search-indexer/infra/search-indexer-service.ts (2)
1-7: LGTM! Clean import addition
The CodeOwners import is properly grouped with other dsl imports and follows the existing code structure.
41-41: Verify code ownership assignment and consider documentation
The code owner addition is well-placed in the service configuration. Given this service's critical nature (handling search indexing and data migrations), proper ownership tracking is important.
Let's verify the ownership assignment and related documentation:
Consider adding ownership information to the service's README.md to make it more discoverable.
✅ Verification successful
Code ownership assignment is correctly documented and aligned
The ownership assignment to Stefna is verified and properly documented:
- The README.md explicitly lists Stefna as one of the code owners
- The
.codeOwner(CodeOwners.Stefna)configuration aligns with the documented ownership - Other services in the codebase follow the same pattern of code ownership assignment
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for ownership documentation in README files
echo "Checking for ownership documentation..."
fd README.md apps/services/search-indexer -x grep -l "owner" {} \;
# Check for consistent ownership across related services
echo "Checking for related service ownership..."
rg "CodeOwners.Stefna" apps/services/
Length of output: 423
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the actual content of the README to see what ownership information it contains
echo "Content of search-indexer README:"
cat apps/services/search-indexer/README.md
# Let's also check for other code ownership assignments in the codebase to understand the pattern
echo -e "\nChecking other CodeOwners usage:"
rg "CodeOwners\." -A 1 apps/services/
Length of output: 4794
charts/services/endorsement-system-api/values.dev.yaml (1)
28-28: Verify the code owner value
The code owner 'juni' has been assigned to this service. Please ensure this is the correct team identifier and that it matches the standardized team naming convention used across other services.
Let's verify the consistency of code owner values:
✅ Verification successful
Code owner value 'juni' is consistently used across related services
The code owner value 'juni' is consistently used across all related services in the codebase, including:
- User notification services (API and workers)
- Endorsement system API
- All environments (dev, staging, prod)
This appears to be a standardized team identifier as it's used consistently across multiple related services and matches the pattern of other team identifiers in the codebase (e.g., 'aranja', 'core', 'stefna', etc.).
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for other occurrences of 'juni' as a code owner
rg "CODE_OWNER:.*juni" -A 5 -B 5
# List all unique CODE_OWNER values across the codebase
rg "CODE_OWNER:.*" -o | sort | uniq
Length of output: 28514
charts/services/endorsement-system-api/values.prod.yaml (2)
28-28: Verify code owner value consistency
The code owner value 'juni' has been added. While this aligns with the logging context enhancement initiative, let's verify its consistency with other services owned by the same team.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner value 'juni' is consistently used across related services
The verification shows that the code owner value 'juni' is consistently used across all environments (dev, staging, prod) for the following related services:
- endorsement-system-api
- user-notification
- user-notification-worker
- user-notification-cleanup-worker
This consistency indicates proper alignment in the code ownership designation.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for other services with the same code owner
rg -l "CODE_OWNER: 'juni'" charts/services/
# Verify if this service appears in any code ownership documentation
fd -t f -e md -e yaml "CODEOWNERS|code-owners|ownership"
Length of output: 811
Line range hint 1-6: Warning: This file is automatically generated
The file header explicitly states not to edit manually and instructs to "Run 'yarn charts' instead". Please ensure this change is made through the appropriate source files that generate this configuration.
Let's verify the source of this configuration:
✅ Verification successful
Warning: This file is automatically generated but changes are valid
The file is indeed automatically generated, but the changes are being made through the proper infrastructure code. The CODE_OWNER value is set via the codeOwner() method in the service builder DSL (infra/src/dsl/dsl.ts), which is then used to generate the Kubernetes values files. The warning in the file header is correct - direct edits to the file should be avoided, but the current changes are being properly implemented through the infrastructure code.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for the source files that generate this configuration
fd -t f -e ts -e js charts.config
Length of output: 35
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try different approaches to find the source of chart generation
# 1. Look for package.json to find the charts script
cat package.json | jq -r '.scripts.charts'
# 2. Search for files related to chart generation
fd -t f -e yaml -e yml -e js -e ts -e json "chart" --full-path
# 3. Search for specific patterns in files
rg -l "yarn charts" .
Length of output: 20480
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the chart generation source code
cat infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts
# Also check for any configuration files that might define CODE_OWNER
rg -l "CODE_OWNER" infra/
Length of output: 2598
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the DSL file that was found containing CODE_OWNER
cat infra/src/dsl/dsl.ts
# Also check the environment rendering logic
cat infra/src/cli/render-env.ts
Length of output: 18834
charts/services/endorsement-system-api/values.staging.yaml (1)
28-28: LGTM! Verify consistency with other services.
The addition of the CODE_OWNER environment variable is correctly placed and follows the established pattern.
Let's verify the consistency of CODE_OWNER values across services:
✅ Verification successful
CODE_OWNER value 'juni' is consistent with related services
The verification shows that the CODE_OWNER value 'juni' is consistently used across all related services in the endorsement and notification system family:
- endorsement-system-api
- user-notification
- user-notification-worker
- user-notification-cleanup-worker
The value follows the established team naming pattern used throughout the codebase, where different teams (juni, aranja, stefna, etc.) own different service groups.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER values across all service configurations
# Expected: Consistent team naming across services
# Search for CODE_OWNER in all yaml files under charts/
fd -e yaml -e yml . charts/ --exec grep -l "CODE_OWNER:" {} \; | while read -r file; do
echo "=== $file ==="
grep "CODE_OWNER:" "$file"
done
Length of output: 16808
charts/services/search-indexer-service/values.dev.yaml (1)
24-24: Verify if 'stefna' is the correct code owner
The addition of CODE_OWNER environment variable aligns with the PR objectives for better log tracking and team accountability.
✅ Verification successful
'stefna' is the correct code owner for this service
The verification confirms that:
- 'stefna' is consistently set as CODE_OWNER across all environments (dev, staging, prod) for the search-indexer-service
- This matches the code ownership pattern where 'stefna' also owns related web services
- The value is one of the eight legitimate code owners used across the services (Advania, aranja, core, hugsmidjan, juni, norda-applications, origo, stefna)
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistency of code ownership across different environments and related services
# Check code owner in other environments
echo "Checking code owner across environments..."
rg "CODE_OWNER.*stefna" "charts/services/search-indexer-service/"
# Check for related services that might need the same owner
echo "Checking related services..."
fd "values.*yaml" "charts/services" --exec rg "CODE_OWNER.*stefna" {}
Length of output: 676
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's get more specific information about code ownership patterns
# Check all unique CODE_OWNER values across all services
echo "All unique CODE_OWNER values:"
fd "values.*yaml" "charts/services" --exec rg "CODE_OWNER:" {} | sort | uniq
# Check which specific services have 'stefna' as CODE_OWNER
echo -e "\nServices with stefna as CODE_OWNER:"
fd "values.*yaml" "charts/services" --type f --exec sh -c 'if grep -l "CODE_OWNER.*stefna" "$1" >/dev/null; then echo "$1"; fi' sh {}
# Check if initContainer sections have CODE_OWNER
echo -e "\nChecking initContainer sections in search-indexer-service:"
rg -A 5 "initContainer" "charts/services/search-indexer-service/values.*yaml"
Length of output: 1150
charts/services/search-indexer-service/values.prod.yaml (2)
24-24: Verify code owner consistency across environments
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'stefna' aligns with the PR objectives for adding code ownership context. However, we should verify this value is consistent across all environment configurations.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner value is consistent across all environments
The verification confirms that CODE_OWNER: 'stefna' is consistently set across all environment configurations (dev, staging, and prod) for the search-indexer-service.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER value across different environment configurations
# for the search-indexer-service
# Search for CODE_OWNER in all yaml files under the service directory
rg "CODE_OWNER:" charts/services/search-indexer-service/
Length of output: 295
Line range hint 1-7:
The file header explicitly states "Do not edit this file manually" and instructs to "Run 'yarn charts' instead". Please ensure this change is being made through the proper generation process rather than direct manual editing.
charts/services/search-indexer-service/values.staging.yaml (1)
24-24: Verify code ownership consistency across environments
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'stefna' aligns with the PR's objective to enhance logging with code ownership information. However, we should verify this configuration across other environments.
✅ Verification successful
Code ownership configuration is consistent across environments
The verification confirms that CODE_OWNER: 'stefna' is consistently set across all environments (dev, staging, and prod) for the search-indexer-service, which aligns with the PR's objective of standardizing code ownership information for enhanced logging.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER consistency across environments for search-indexer-service
# Search for CODE_OWNER in all values files for this service
fd --type f "values.*\.yaml$" "charts/services/search-indexer-service" --exec grep -H "CODE_OWNER:"
Length of output: 336
charts/services/license-api/values.prod.yaml (1)
22-22: Verify code owner value consistency
The code owner value 'hugsmidjan' has been added for the license-api service. This aligns with the PR objectives for implementing code ownership.
Let's verify the consistency of code owner values across different environments and services:
✅ Verification successful
Code owner values are consistent across environments
The verification confirms:
- The code owner value 'hugsmidjan' is consistently set across all environments (dev, staging, prod) for the license-api service
- This aligns with other services where 'hugsmidjan' is also the code owner (e.g., regulations-admin-backend)
- Each service has a clearly defined code owner, following the established pattern
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER consistency across environments and related services
# Check CODE_OWNER values across different environments for license-api
echo "Checking CODE_OWNER across license-api environments:"
fd --type f "values.*\.yaml$" "charts/services/license-api" --exec grep -H "CODE_OWNER:"
# Check CODE_OWNER values in other related services
echo -e "\nChecking CODE_OWNER in other services:"
fd --type f "values.prod.yaml$" "charts/services" --exec grep -H "CODE_OWNER:"
Length of output: 2084
charts/services/license-api/values.dev.yaml (2)
22-22: LGTM! Verify consistency across environments.
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'hugsmidjan' aligns with the PR objectives for enhanced logging context and team ownership tracking.
Let's verify the consistency of CODE_OWNER across all environments for this service:
✅ Verification successful
CODE_OWNER value is consistent across all environments
The verification confirms that CODE_OWNER: 'hugsmidjan' is consistently set across all environment files (dev, staging, and prod) for the license-api service, which aligns with the logging enhancement objectives.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER consistency across environments for license-api
# Expected: Same value ('hugsmidjan') in all environment files
for env in dev staging prod; do
echo "Checking values.${env}.yaml:"
rg "CODE_OWNER:" "charts/services/license-api/values.${env}.yaml"
done
Length of output: 551
Line range hint 1-7: Document the auto-generation process for CODE_OWNER.
The file header indicates it's auto-generated using "yarn charts". Since we're adding a new environment variable, ensure the charts generation process is documented to include how CODE_OWNER values should be configured.
Let's check if documentation exists:
charts/services/user-notification/values.prod.yaml (2)
29-29: Verify code ownership assignment
The code owner 'juni' has been assigned to the user-notification service. Let's verify this matches the pattern used across other services and aligns with the team structure.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner assignment is consistent with existing patterns
The code owner 'juni' is consistently assigned across related services in the ecosystem:
- All user-notification related services (main service, worker, cleanup-worker)
- The endorsement-system-api service
- Multiple components in islandis charts
This shows a clear pattern of ownership and aligns with the existing team structure.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check CODE_OWNER values across other services
rg "CODE_OWNER:" "charts/services/*/values.prod.yaml"
# Check if 'juni' appears as a code owner in other configurations
rg -i "juni" "charts/"
Length of output: 1782
Line range hint 1-6: Warning: This file is automatically generated
The file header explicitly states that manual edits should not be made. Instead, use "yarn charts" to generate the file. Please ensure this change is made through the appropriate source configuration.
Let's verify the source of this configuration:
charts/services/services-auth-delegation-api/values.prod.yaml (1)
22-22: LGTM! Verify consistency across services.
The addition of CODE_OWNER environment variable aligns with the PR objectives for implementing code ownership in logging.
Let's verify the consistency of code owner values across other services:
✅ Verification successful
The previous output was quite large and mixed. Let's get a more focused view of auth-related services to verify consistency.
The previous command had issues with the path. Let's try using ripgrep directly to check the auth-related services' CODE_OWNER values.
✓ CODE_OWNER value is consistent across auth services
The verification shows that all auth-related services consistently use CODE_OWNER: 'aranja' across their configurations in dev, staging, and prod environments. This includes:
- services-auth-public-api
- services-auth-ids-api
- services-auth-delegation-api
- services-auth-admin-api
- auth-admin-web
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER values across all service configurations
# Expected: Consistent code owner values for related auth services
# Search for CODE_OWNER in all yaml files under charts/services
fd . charts/services -e yaml -x rg -l 'CODE_OWNER:'
# Show the actual values
fd . charts/services -e yaml -x rg -A 1 'CODE_OWNER:'
Length of output: 8480
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's specifically check the CODE_OWNER values for auth-related services
fd . "charts/services/services-auth-" -e yaml -x rg -A 1 'CODE_OWNER:'
# Also check if there are any other auth-related services we might have missed
fd . charts/services -e yaml -x rg -l 'auth|Auth'
Length of output: 3994
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to check CODE_OWNER values for auth services
rg -A 1 "CODE_OWNER:" charts/services/services-auth-* charts/services/auth-*
Length of output: 4001
charts/services/license-api/values.staging.yaml (1)
Line range hint 1-8: Verify the chart generation process
The file header indicates this is auto-generated. Ensure the CODE_OWNER addition is properly integrated into the chart generation process.
✅ Verification successful
Chart generation process verified
The CODE_OWNER environment variable is consistently added across all environments (dev, staging, prod) in the license-api service. The chart generation is handled through a dedicated script (generate-chart-values.ts) in the infra package, which can be executed via yarn charts command. The auto-generation process is properly integrated into the project's infrastructure.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if CODE_OWNER is consistently added across environments
# and verify the chart generation process
# Check for CODE_OWNER in related value files
echo "Checking CODE_OWNER across environments..."
rg "CODE_OWNER.*hugsmidjan" charts/services/license-api/
# Look for chart generation scripts
echo -e "\nLocating chart generation configuration..."
fd -t f "package.json|yarn.lock" . -x rg -l "charts"
Length of output: 573
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the chart generation scripts and configuration
echo "Checking package.json for chart generation scripts..."
cat package.json | jq '.scripts | select(. | tostring | contains("chart"))'
echo -e "\nChecking for chart templates or configuration..."
fd -e yaml -e yml . --full-path --base-directory charts/services/license-api
echo -e "\nChecking for chart generation source code..."
rg -l "charts.*generate" --type ts --type js
Length of output: 2806
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the infra directory for chart generation logic
echo "Checking infra/package.json for chart scripts..."
cat infra/package.json | jq '.scripts | select(. | tostring | contains("chart"))'
echo -e "\nLooking for chart generation templates or configuration..."
fd -e yaml -e yml . --full-path --base-directory infra/charts
echo -e "\nChecking for chart generation source code in infra..."
rg -l "generateChart|generateValues" infra/
Length of output: 1015
charts/services/user-notification/values.dev.yaml (2)
29-29: Verify consistent code ownership across services
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'juni' aligns with the PR objectives for logging context. However, we should verify that this value is consistent with other services' code ownership configuration.
Let's check code ownership values across other services:
✅ Verification successful
Code ownership is consistent within the user-notification service group
The CODE_OWNER: 'juni' value is consistent across all user-notification related services:
- user-notification: juni
- user-notification-worker: juni
- user-notification-cleanup-worker: juni
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for CODE_OWNER definitions in other service configurations
rg "CODE_OWNER:" charts/services/*/values.dev.yaml
Length of output: 4420
Line range hint 1-7:
The file header explicitly states not to edit manually and instructs to "Run 'yarn charts' instead". Please ensure this change is made through the appropriate source configuration rather than direct modification.
Let's verify the source of this configuration:
charts/services/application-system-api-worker/values.prod.yaml (1)
30-30: LGTM: Code owner configuration aligns with logging enhancement objectives
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'norda-applications' aligns well with the PR's objective of enhancing log tracking and team responsibility assignment. This environment variable will be used by the new logging context system to associate logs with specific teams.
✅ Verification successful
Let me try a different approach to verify the CODE_OWNER configuration.
CODE_OWNER configuration is consistent across environments
The verification confirms that the CODE_OWNER: 'norda-applications' configuration is consistently set across all environment configurations (dev, staging, and prod) in the application-system-api-worker service, properly supporting the logging enhancement objectives.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Verify consistency of CODE_OWNER across other environment configurations
echo "Checking CODE_OWNER consistency across environments..."
fd -g "values.*.yaml" -p "charts/services/application-system-api-worker" -x grep -H "CODE_OWNER"
Length of output: 213
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# List all yaml files in the charts directory and check their content
echo "Listing all yaml files in charts/services/application-system-api-worker:"
fd -e yaml . "charts/services/application-system-api-worker" -x cat {}
Length of output: 13680
charts/services/application-system-api-worker/values.staging.yaml (1)
30-30: LGTM! Verify consistency across environments.
The addition of CODE_OWNER environment variable aligns with the PR objectives for enhanced logging context support.
Let's verify the consistency of this configuration across environments:
✅ Verification successful
Code owner configuration is consistent across environments
The verification confirms that the CODE_OWNER value 'norda-applications' is consistently set across all environments (dev/staging/prod) for the application-system-api-worker service.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER configuration across environments
# Expected: Same code owner value across dev/staging/prod for this service
echo "Checking CODE_OWNER across environments..."
for env in dev staging prod; do
rg "CODE_OWNER:" "charts/services/application-system-api-worker/values.${env}.yaml"
done
Length of output: 531
charts/services/services-auth-delegation-api/values.dev.yaml (2)
22-22: Validate code owner assignment
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'aranja' aligns with the PR's objective of associating logs with specific teams. However, consider the following:
- Ensure 'aranja' is the correct team identifier for this service
- Verify this matches the code ownership configuration in other related auth services
Line range hint 1-7: Verify the file generation process
This file is marked as automatically generated with a warning not to edit manually. Ensure that the changes were made through the proper "yarn charts" command rather than direct file modification.
✅ Verification successful
Let me verify if these changes were made through the proper "yarn charts" command by checking the package.json scripts and any related configuration files.
Let me check the infra directory since the charts command is executed there.
Let me check the content of the chart generation script to verify if the CODE_OWNER changes are properly managed through the automated process.
File generation process is properly managed through automated tooling
The changes to the values files are correctly managed through the automated chart generation process. The evidence shows:
- The
yarn chartscommand is properly implemented in the infrastructure code. - The CODE_OWNER changes are systematically applied across all service configurations through the
ServiceBuilderclass'scodeOwnermethod. - The warning header about not editing manually is automatically added by the
writeYamlFilefunction. - The consistent presence of CODE_OWNER across multiple service configurations confirms the automated nature of these changes.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if there are any direct commits to this file
git log --follow --pretty=format:"%h %s" charts/services/services-auth-delegation-api/values.dev.yaml
# Verify if similar CODE_OWNER changes exist in other service configurations
fd -e yaml -e yml values.dev.yaml charts/services | xargs grep -l "CODE_OWNER.*aranja"
Length of output: 464
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check package.json for charts-related scripts
rg "charts" -A 3 -B 3 package.json
# Look for chart generation configuration or templates
fd -e yaml -e yml template charts/
fd -e js -e ts chart-generator
Length of output: 694
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the infra directory for chart generation related files
fd -e yaml -e yml -e ts -e js . infra | grep -i chart
# Look for the chart generation script content
rg -l "CODE_OWNER" infra/
Length of output: 507
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the chart generation script content
cat infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts
# Check the DSL implementation for CODE_OWNER handling
cat infra/src/dsl/dsl.ts
Length of output: 20896
charts/services/application-system-api-worker/values.dev.yaml (2)
30-30: Verify code ownership consistency across environments
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'norda-applications' aligns with the PR objectives for logging context support. However, we should verify that this value is consistent across all environments.
Let's check the corresponding values in other environment files:
✅ Verification successful
Code ownership is consistent across all environments ✅
The CODE_OWNER value 'norda-applications' is correctly set and consistent across all environment files:
- values.dev.yaml
- values.staging.yaml
- values.prod.yaml
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for CODE_OWNER in related environment files
echo "Checking CODE_OWNER in staging and prod environments..."
rg "CODE_OWNER.*norda-applications" "charts/services/application-system-api-worker/values.*.yaml"
Length of output: 320
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# First, let's find all values files for this service
echo "Finding all values files for application-system-api-worker..."
fd "values.*yaml" charts/services/application-system-api-worker
# Then check for CODE_OWNER in all found files
echo -e "\nChecking CODE_OWNER in all environment files:"
fd "values.*yaml" charts/services/application-system-api-worker --exec grep -H "CODE_OWNER" {} \;
Length of output: 893
Line range hint 1-6: Warning: This file is automatically generated
The file header indicates that manual changes might be overwritten. Ensure that the CODE_OWNER addition is made through the proper source configuration that generates these files using "yarn charts".
Let's verify the source of this configuration:
charts/services/user-notification/values.staging.yaml (2)
29-29: Document CODE_OWNER format and allowed values
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'juni' needs documentation about:
- The purpose and impact of this configuration
- The allowed values for code owners
- How this integrates with the logging system
This will help maintain consistency across services and environments.
Let's check if documentation exists:
Line range hint 1-6: Warning: Modifying an auto-generated file
The file header explicitly states not to edit manually and to run "yarn charts" instead. Please ensure this change is made through the proper generation process to maintain consistency.
Let's verify if similar files exist and check their generation process:
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the generation process.
Let me check the chart generation source to understand how these files are managed.
Manual changes to values files are not recommended, but CODE_OWNER is consistently defined
The verification reveals that:
- The chart values are generated through a structured process using
generate-chart-values.ts - The CODE_OWNER value 'juni' is consistently set across all environments (dev/staging/prod)
- The generation process preserves environment-specific configurations
While the warning about manual edits is valid, this appears to be a coordinated change across all environments, likely managed through the proper configuration channels. The consistency suggests this was implemented through the correct process, despite the manual edit warning.
Recommendation: Work with the infrastructure team to ensure the CODE_OWNER value is properly integrated into the chart generation process to avoid future manual edits.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Find all related values files and their generation source
echo "Related values files:"
fd -g "*values*.yaml" charts/services/user-notification
echo "\nPotential generation source:"
fd -g "*.ts" -g "*.js" charts/services/user-notification
Length of output: 446
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for chart generation scripts in the repository
echo "Searching for chart generation scripts:"
rg -l "yarn charts" --type yaml --type json
echo -e "\nChecking package.json for charts script:"
fd package.json -x cat {} | jq '.scripts | select(.charts != null)'
echo -e "\nChecking content of other values files:"
echo "=== values.dev.yaml ==="
head -n 10 charts/services/user-notification/values.dev.yaml
echo -e "\n=== values.prod.yaml ==="
head -n 10 charts/services/user-notification/values.prod.yaml
Length of output: 12921
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the chart generation source in infra directory
echo "Checking infra directory for chart generation source:"
fd -t f -g "generate-chart-values.ts" infra/
echo -e "\nChecking the content of the generator if found:"
fd -t f -g "generate-chart-values.ts" infra/ -x cat {}
echo -e "\nChecking if CODE_OWNER is defined in other environment files:"
rg "CODE_OWNER" charts/services/user-notification/
Length of output: 3283
charts/services/services-auth-delegation-api/values.staging.yaml (2)
22-22: LGTM! Code ownership configuration aligns with logging enhancement objectives.
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'aranja' properly configures the primary code owner for the auth-delegation-api service, which will be used by the new logging context system to track responsible teams.
22-22: Verify code owner consistency across services.
Let's ensure the code owner configuration is consistent across related auth services mentioned in the PR.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner configuration is consistent across auth services
The verification shows that all auth-related services (services-auth-delegation-api, services-auth-ids-api, services-auth-admin-api, services-auth-public-api, auth-admin-web, services-sessions) consistently use 'aranja' as the CODE_OWNER across all environments (dev, staging, prod).
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER configuration across auth-related services
# Expected: Consistent code ownership configuration across related services
# Search for CODE_OWNER in auth-related service configurations
fd -e yaml -e yml . charts/services/ -x grep -l "CODE_OWNER" {} \; | while read -r file; do
echo "=== $file ==="
grep "CODE_OWNER:" "$file"
done
Length of output: 14334
charts/services/services-university-gateway/values.dev.yaml (2)
26-26: Ensure logging configuration is complete
The CODE_OWNER environment variable has been added, but verify if additional logging-related configurations are needed to support the new context functionality mentioned in the PR objectives.
✅ Verification successful
Logging configuration is properly set up
The service already has the necessary logging configurations in place:
LOG_LEVEL: 'info'for setting the logging verbosityNODE_OPTIONS: '--max-old-space-size=345 -r dd-trace/init'for DataDog tracingCODE_OWNER: 'origo'for ownership tracking
No additional logging-related configurations are needed as the current setup follows the standard pattern with log level control and tracing integration.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for logging-related configurations across services
# Expected: Find common logging patterns to ensure consistency
# Search for logging-related environment variables in other services
fd --type f "values\..*\.yaml$" charts/services | xargs awk '/env:/{p=1}p==1&&/^[[:space:]]*[^[:space:]]+:/{if($1!="env:"){exit}}{if(p==1 && $0~/LOG|TRACE|DD_|DATADOG|CODE_OWNER/){print FILENAME ":" FNR ":" $0}}'
Length of output: 214
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find logging configurations
# First, let's check the specific file for all environment variables
cat charts/services/services-university-gateway/values.dev.yaml
# Also check other environment files in the same service
fd --type f "values.*\.yaml$" charts/services/services-university-gateway
# And let's look for any logging-related patterns in yaml files
rg -l "LOG|TRACE|DD_|DATADOG|CODE_OWNER" charts/services/services-university-gateway/
Length of output: 5217
26-26: Verify code owner consistency with related university services
The code owner is set to 'origo' for this university gateway service. Let's verify if this ownership assignment is consistent with related university services and documentation.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner value is consistent across environments
The verification shows that the CODE_OWNER value 'origo' is consistently set across all environments (development, staging, and production) for the university-gateway service. No other university-related services were found in the charts directory, indicating this is the only university service currently deployed.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check code owner consistency across university-related services
# Expected: Find all related university service configurations and their CODE_OWNER values
# Search for other university-related service configurations
fd --type f "values\..*\.yaml$" charts/services | xargs grep -l "university" | xargs grep -l "CODE_OWNER"
Length of output: 288
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the actual CODE_OWNER values in these files
echo "=== Development Environment ==="
grep "CODE_OWNER" charts/services/services-university-gateway/values.dev.yaml
echo -e "\n=== Staging Environment ==="
grep "CODE_OWNER" charts/services/services-university-gateway/values.staging.yaml
echo -e "\n=== Production Environment ==="
grep "CODE_OWNER" charts/services/services-university-gateway/values.prod.yaml
# Let's also check if there are any other university services that might not have CODE_OWNER set
echo -e "\n=== Other University Services ==="
fd --type f "values\..*\.yaml$" charts/services | grep "university" | grep -v "gateway"
Length of output: 694
apps/services/auth/admin-api/infra/auth-admin-api.ts (2)
2-2: LGTM: Clean import addition
The CodeOwners import is correctly placed within the existing DSL imports group.
31-31: Verify consistent code ownership across auth services
The code owner configuration is correctly implemented. Let's verify consistency across related auth services.
✅ Verification successful
Code ownership configuration is consistent across auth services
All auth services (admin-api, delegation-api, ids-api, and public-api) consistently use CodeOwners.Aranja as their code owner configuration.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify consistent code ownership configuration across auth services
# Expected: All auth services should use CodeOwners.Aranja
echo "Checking code ownership in auth services..."
rg -A 1 "service\(['\"].*auth.*['\"]" apps/services/auth/ | rg -A 1 "codeOwner"
Length of output: 180
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find code ownership configurations
# First, let's find all infrastructure files in auth services
echo "Finding infrastructure files in auth services..."
fd -e ts "infra" apps/services/auth
# Then search for code ownership patterns in these files
echo -e "\nChecking code ownership configurations..."
rg -l "CodeOwners" apps/services/auth
Length of output: 489
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Now let's check the actual code owner values in these files
echo "Checking code owner configurations in auth services..."
rg -B1 -A1 "codeOwner\(" apps/services/auth/public-api/infra/auth-public-api.ts apps/services/auth/ids-api/infra/ids-api.ts apps/services/auth/delegation-api/infra/delegation-api.ts apps/services/auth/admin-api/infra/auth-admin-api.ts
Length of output: 1309
charts/services/services-university-gateway/values.prod.yaml (1)
26-26: LGTM! Verify consistency with other services.
The addition of CODE_OWNER environment variable aligns with the PR objectives for enhanced logging context.
Let's verify the consistency of code ownership across other services:
✅ Verification successful
CODE_OWNER value 'origo' is consistent across environments
The verification shows that the CODE_OWNER value 'origo' is consistently set across all environments (dev, staging, prod) for the university-gateway service. This aligns with the established pattern where each service maintains consistent code ownership across environments, as seen with other services:
- aranja: auth services, service-portal-api
- juni: user-notification services
- stefna: web, search-indexer
- hugsmidjan: regulations, license services
- core: bff-portals-admin
- Advania: consultation-portal
- norda-applications: application-system
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER values across all service configurations
# Expected: Consistent code ownership patterns across related services
# Search for CODE_OWNER in all yaml files
rg -l "CODE_OWNER:" "charts/" | while read -r file; do
echo "=== $file ==="
rg "CODE_OWNER:" "$file" -A 1
done
Length of output: 24930
charts/services/services-university-gateway/values.staging.yaml (2)
26-26: LGTM: Code owner addition aligns with logging enhancement initiative
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'origo' aligns with the PR objectives to support code ownership in logging context. This will help DevOps identify the responsible team for logs from this service.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner configuration is consistent across all environments
The verification confirms that CODE_OWNER: 'origo' is correctly set in all environment configurations (dev, staging, and prod) for the university-gateway service, ensuring consistent ownership attribution in logging across environments.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Verify consistency of CODE_OWNER across environments
echo "Checking CODE_OWNER consistency across environments..."
for env in dev prod; do
rg "CODE_OWNER.*origo" "charts/services/services-university-gateway/values.${env}.yaml" || echo "Missing or different CODE_OWNER in ${env} environment"
done
Length of output: 377
Line range hint 1-6: Caution: This file is auto-generated
The warning at the top of the file indicates that manual edits should not be made directly to this file. Instead, use the yarn charts command to generate it. Ensure that your changes are made through the appropriate source configuration.
✅ Verification successful
Manual edits to this file are not recommended - use yarn charts command
The warning is correct and verified. The file is automatically generated by the chart generation script (src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts). The script:
- Reads chart configurations from source files
- Generates values files for both umbrella and individual service charts
- Adds the warning header to prevent manual edits
- Places the generated files in
charts/services/<service-name>/values.<env>.yaml
Any changes to the configuration should be made through the source files and then regenerated using yarn charts command.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Verify if there's a source template or configuration that generates this file
fd -g "*charts*template*" -x echo "Found potential template source: {}"
Length of output: 73
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try different approaches to find the source of chart generation
# 1. Look for package.json scripts related to charts
echo "=== Checking package.json for chart-related scripts ==="
fd package.json --exec grep -l "charts" {} | xargs cat
# 2. Look for any yaml files that might be templates
echo -e "\n=== Looking for yaml templates ==="
fd -e yaml -e yml --exec grep -l "template" {}
# 3. Search for documentation about chart generation
echo -e "\n=== Checking for documentation about chart generation ==="
fd README.md --exec grep -i -A 5 "chart" {}
Length of output: 24372
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the specific chart generation process and templates
echo "=== Checking chart generation script ==="
fd -t f -p "src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts" -x cat {}
echo -e "\n=== Checking for chart templates related to university gateway ==="
fd -t f -p "services-university-gateway" -x echo "Found: {}"
echo -e "\n=== Looking for chart source configurations ==="
fd -t f -p "university-gateway.*\.ts" -x echo "Found configuration: {}"
Length of output: 10642
charts/services/services-auth-admin-api/values.dev.yaml (1)
Line range hint 1-7:
The file header explicitly states not to edit this file manually and to run "yarn charts" instead. Please ensure that this change is being made through the appropriate source configuration that generates this file.
charts/services/services-auth-admin-api/values.staging.yaml (2)
22-22: Verify code owner value consistency across services
The code owner value 'aranja' should be consistent with other related services in the auth domain. Let's verify this.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner value 'aranja' is consistent across auth domain services
The verification shows that all auth-related services under the auth domain have 'aranja' as their CODE_OWNER:
- services-auth-public-api: 'aranja'
- services-auth-ids-api: 'aranja'
- services-auth-admin-api: 'aranja'
- services-auth-delegation-api: 'aranja'
- auth-admin-web: 'aranja'
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check CODE_OWNER values across related auth service configurations
echo "Checking CODE_OWNER values in auth-related services:"
fd -t f "values.staging.yaml" -p "charts/services" \
-E "**/templates/*" \
-X grep -l "auth" {} \; \
-X grep "CODE_OWNER:" {}
Length of output: 3134
Line range hint 1-6:
The file header explicitly states not to edit manually and instructs to run "yarn charts" instead. Ensure that the CODE_OWNER change is made through the appropriate source configuration that generates this file.
charts/services/user-notification-worker/values.prod.yaml (1)
Line range hint 1-6:
The header comment indicates this file should not be edited manually. Ensure changes are made through the proper channel by running "yarn charts".
✅ Verification successful
The verification confirms that:
- The file is generated through the
yarn chartscommand, which runsgenerate-chart-values.ts - The header comment is automatically added by the chart generation process
- The generation process handles service-specific values and global configurations systematically
To make changes to this file:
- Use the chart generation system by running
yarn charts - Modify the source configurations in the infrastructure code instead of editing the generated file directly
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Verify if this file is generated and managed by charts
fd -g "*.ts" -x rg -l "user-notification-worker.*values\.prod\.yaml"
Length of output: 70
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader search to find any references to chart generation
rg -l "yarn charts" --type ts --type js
# Also search for any chart generation related files
fd -e ts -e js -x rg -l "generateCharts|chartGenerator"
# Look for package.json scripts related to charts
fd "package.json" -x rg -A 5 -B 5 '"charts":'
Length of output: 1279
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the chart generation implementation
cat infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts
# Also check the YAML file format handling
cat infra/src/dsl/file-formats/yaml.ts
# Look for any chart templates or source files
fd -g "*values.template.*" -X ls -la
Length of output: 3819
charts/services/service-portal-api/values.prod.yaml (1)
Line range hint 1-6: Warning: File marked as automatically generated contains manual changes
The file header explicitly states "Do not edit this file manually" and instructs to "Run 'yarn charts' instead". However, changes have been made directly to this file. This could lead to changes being overwritten by the generation process.
Please verify:
- Should this change be made in the source templates instead?
- Is the generation process aware of this new environment variable?
charts/services/user-notification-worker/values.staging.yaml (1)
30-30: Verify consistent code ownership across related services
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'juni' aligns with the PR objectives for logging ownership. However, let's verify consistency across related services.
✅ Verification successful
Code ownership is consistent across all notification services
The verification confirms that CODE_OWNER: 'juni' is consistently set across all related notification services (user-notification, user-notification-worker, user-notification-cleanup-worker) in all environments (dev, staging, prod).
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER consistency across related notification services
echo "Checking CODE_OWNER values in related service configurations..."
for env in dev staging prod; do
for service in user-notification user-notification-worker user-notification-cleanup-worker; do
file="charts/services/${service}/values.${env}.yaml"
if [ -f "$file" ]; then
echo "=== ${file} ==="
rg "CODE_OWNER:" "$file" || echo "No CODE_OWNER found"
fi
done
done
Length of output: 4465
charts/services/service-portal-api/values.dev.yaml (1)
Line range hint 1-6: Ensure this file was generated using the 'yarn charts' command
The file header indicates it should not be edited manually. Please confirm that the changes were made through the proper generation process using 'yarn charts'.
✅ Verification successful
The file is correctly managed through automated generation
The verification confirms that:
- The file is part of an automated chart generation system managed by
generate-chart-values.ts - The script properly adds the warning header about manual edits
- Changes to environment variables (like CODE_OWNER) should be made through the chart generation process, not by editing the values files directly
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if there are any recent changes to chart generation scripts
git log -n 5 --pretty=format:"%h %s" -- "**/chart*.js" "**/chart*.ts"
Length of output: 0
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try to find chart generation related files and scripts
fd -e js -e ts chart
# Also check package.json for chart-related scripts
fd package.json -x cat {} | grep -i chart
Length of output: 908
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the chart generation script content
cat infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts
# Also check if there are any recent changes to values files
git log -n 3 --oneline -- "charts/services/service-portal-api/values.dev.yaml"
Length of output: 2551
charts/services/service-portal-api/values.staging.yaml (2)
24-24: Verify code owner value consistency
The code owner value 'aranja' appears consistent with other services mentioned in the changes. However, let's verify this is the correct team assignment for the service-portal-api service.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner value 'aranja' is consistent across related services
The verification shows that 'aranja' is consistently set as the CODE_OWNER across multiple related authentication and service portal services in the staging environment, including:
- identity-server
- auth-admin-web
- service-portal-api
- services-auth-delegation-api
- services-auth-ids-api
- services-auth-public-api
- services-sessions
- services-auth-admin-api
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for consistency in CODE_OWNER values across all staging value files
fd -g "*values.staging.yaml" | xargs rg "CODE_OWNER:.*aranja" -A 1 -B 1
Length of output: 4119
Line range hint 1-6:
The file header indicates this is an automatically generated file. To prevent your changes from being overwritten, ensure you're updating the source templates used by the "yarn charts" command instead of modifying this file directly.
charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.prod.yaml (1)
22-22: LGTM! Verify code owner consistency across services.
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'aranja' aligns with the PR objectives for logging context support.
Let's verify the consistency of code ownership across related services:
✅ Verification successful
Code owner value is consistent across auth services
The verification confirms that all auth-related services (services-auth-* and related services like services-sessions, service-portal-api, and auth-admin-web) consistently use CODE_OWNER: 'aranja' across all environments (dev, staging, prod).
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER values across related auth services
# Expected: Should find consistent ownership across related auth services
# Search for CODE_OWNER in all auth-related value files
fd -e yaml -e yml . charts/services | xargs rg "CODE_OWNER.*aranja" -l
# Check if there are any auth services with different code owners
fd -e yaml -e yml . charts/services | xargs rg "services-auth.*CODE_OWNER:.*[^aranja]" -l
Length of output: 1327
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the actual CODE_OWNER values in auth services
fd -e yaml -e yml . charts/services | xargs rg "CODE_OWNER:" -A1
Length of output: 11789
charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.dev.yaml (2)
22-22: Verify code owner value consistency across environments
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'aranja' aligns with the PR objectives for tracking code ownership. However, we should verify this value is consistent across all environments and related services.
✅ Verification successful
CODE_OWNER value is consistent across environments for services-auth-public-api
The value 'aranja' for CODE_OWNER is consistently set across all environments (dev, staging, prod) for the services-auth-public-api service:
- charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.dev.yaml:
CODE_OWNER: 'aranja' - charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.staging.yaml:
CODE_OWNER: 'aranja' - charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.prod.yaml:
CODE_OWNER: 'aranja'
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for consistency of CODE_OWNER values across all value files
rg -l "CODE_OWNER:" charts/ | xargs rg "CODE_OWNER:"
Length of output: 8052
Line range hint 1-6:
The file header indicates this is an auto-generated file. Please ensure the CODE_OWNER addition is made through the yarn charts command rather than direct manual edits.
✅ Verification successful
✅ Changes appear to be properly implemented across environments
The CODE_OWNER value 'aranja' is consistently set across all environment files (dev, staging, and prod), and each file contains the proper auto-generation warning header. This suggests the changes were made through the correct yarn charts workflow rather than manual edits.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if there are other similar files that should have consistent changes
fd --type f "values\.(dev|staging|prod)\.yaml$" charts/services/services-auth-public-api/
Length of output: 267
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the content of all environment files to verify the warning header and CODE_OWNER consistency
echo "=== values.dev.yaml ==="
head -n 6 charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.dev.yaml
grep -A 1 "CODE_OWNER" charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.dev.yaml || echo "No CODE_OWNER in dev"
echo -e "\n=== values.staging.yaml ==="
head -n 6 charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.staging.yaml
grep -A 1 "CODE_OWNER" charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.staging.yaml || echo "No CODE_OWNER in staging"
echo -e "\n=== values.prod.yaml ==="
head -n 6 charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.prod.yaml
grep -A 1 "CODE_OWNER" charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.prod.yaml || echo "No CODE_OWNER in prod"
Length of output: 1774
charts/services/services-auth-public-api/values.staging.yaml (1)
22-22: Verify the code owner value and configuration process
Since this file is automatically generated (as per the header comment), ensure that:
- 'aranja' is the correct code owner for this service
- The code owner is being set in the source configuration that generates this file
✅ Verification successful
Code owner value 'aranja' is consistently used across all environments and services
The verification shows that 'aranja' is consistently set as the CODE_OWNER across multiple services and all environments (dev, staging, prod). This includes:
- All auth-related services (public-api, admin-api, ids-api, delegation-api)
- Identity server configurations
- Service portal configurations
- IslandIS configurations
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for other code owner configurations and source files
rg -g '!node_modules' -g '!dist' -g '!*.lock' "CODE_OWNER.*aranja"
# Look for the chart generation source
fd -g '*chart*' -t f . | rg -l "services-auth-public-api"
Length of output: 3109
apps/services/auth/public-api/infra/auth-public-api.ts (2)
1-6: LGTM! Clean import organization.
The addition of CodeOwners import maintains the existing import structure and follows the module's organization pattern.
31-31: Verify code ownership assignment and document logging implications.
The code owner configuration is correctly implemented. However, given this service's critical nature (auth, identity server), please:
- Confirm that Aranja is indeed the intended owner for this authentication service
- Consider documenting how this ownership affects log aggregation and DevOps workflows in Datadog
Let's verify other auth service ownership configurations:
✅ Verification successful
Code ownership configuration is consistent across auth services
The code owner configuration is correctly implemented and consistent. All auth service APIs (public-api, ids-api, delegation-api, and admin-api) are consistently configured with Aranja as the code owner. This alignment across the authentication services indicates an intentional ownership assignment.
- All four auth APIs use
CodeOwners.Aranja - The configuration is consistently placed in the infrastructure setup
- Personal representative services don't have code ownership defined yet, suggesting a phased rollout
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check code ownership consistency across auth services
# Expected: All auth services should have consistent ownership
echo "Checking code ownership in auth services..."
rg -A 1 "service\('services-auth-" apps/services/auth/
rg -A 1 "\.codeOwner" apps/services/auth/
Length of output: 2120
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check if there are any other code owners defined in the auth services
# and look for any documentation about code ownership
# Check for any other code owners in the codebase
rg -g "*.ts" "CodeOwners\." apps/services/auth/
# Look for documentation about code ownership
fd README.md apps/services/auth/
Length of output: 732
charts/services/services-auth-ids-api/values.prod.yaml (2)
22-22: Verify code owner configuration across services
The addition of CODE_OWNER: 'aranja' aligns with the PR objectives for logging context support. Let's verify consistency across other services.
✅ Verification successful
CODE_OWNER configuration is consistent with existing patterns
The CODE_OWNER: 'aranja' configuration in services-auth-ids-api aligns with the existing pattern in the codebase. The verification shows that:
- Multiple services already use 'aranja' as their CODE_OWNER value
- Other valid CODE_OWNER values in use include: 'Advania', 'stefna', 'juni', 'origo', 'core', 'hugsmidjan', and 'norda-applications'
- The value format (single quotes) matches the standard format used across services
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for CODE_OWNER configuration across other services
# Look for CODE_OWNER in other values files
echo "Checking CODE_OWNER configuration in other services..."
rg "CODE_OWNER:" "charts/services/*/values*.yaml"
# Check if 'aranja' is consistently used
echo -e "\nChecking for consistency of 'aranja' value..."
rg "CODE_OWNER:\s*['\"]*aranja" "charts/services/*/values*.yaml"
Length of output: 492
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# First, let's find all values.yaml files in the charts/services directory
echo "Finding all values files in charts/services..."
fd "values.*\.yaml$" charts/services
# Then, let's check for CODE_OWNER in these files
echo -e "\nChecking CODE_OWNER configuration..."
fd "values.*\.yaml$" charts/services --exec rg "CODE_OWNER:" {}
# Finally, check for 'aranja' specifically
echo -e "\nChecking for 'aranja' value..."
fd "values.*\.yaml$" charts/services --exec rg "CODE_OWNER:\s*['\"]*aranja" {}
Length of output: 10987
Line range hint 1-6:
As indicated by the header comment, this file should not be edited manually. Please ensure the changes are made through the appropriate source and regenerated using yarn charts.
✅ Verification successful
The file is correctly generated and follows established patterns
The verification confirms that:
- The file is part of an automated chart generation process managed by
infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts - The
CODE_OWNERfield is consistently used across multiple services in their respective chart values files - The value 'aranja' is already used as a code owner in other services managed by the same team
The warning about manual edits is valid, but the change itself is being applied through the proper generation process as indicated by the PR context.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify if the file was generated correctly
# Check if the source files for chart generation exist
fd -g "*charts*generator*"
Length of output: 28
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try different approaches to find chart generation related files
# 1. Look for package.json to find chart generation scripts
fd -g "package.json" --exec grep -l "charts"
# 2. Look for any files with chart generation related content
rg -l "yarn charts"
# 3. Look for yaml files in charts directory to understand structure
fd -e yaml -p "charts/"
Length of output: 18330
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the chart generation source and process
# 1. Check the chart generation script in package.json
cat infra/package.json | jq -r '.scripts.charts'
# 2. Look at the chart generation implementation
cat infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts
# 3. Check if other services have the CODE_OWNER field
rg "CODE_OWNER:" "charts/services/"
Length of output: 7215
apps/services/user-notification/infra/user-notification.ts (2)
8-8: LGTM: Import addition is well-placed
The CodeOwners import is correctly grouped with other DSL-related imports.
60-60: Verify code ownership assignment
The service is assigned to CodeOwners.Juni. This aligns with the PR objectives for tracking ownership, but let's verify if this is the intended owner for the user notification service.
✅ Verification successful
Code owner assignment to Juni is correct
The assignment of CodeOwners.Juni to the user-notification service is appropriate as:
- Juni is a valid code owner defined in the codebase's
CodeOwnersenum - The user-notification service has multiple components (main service, worker, cleanup worker) that should maintain consistent ownership
- No conflicting ownership assignments were found for this service
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any existing code owner assignments for user-notification service
rg -l "user-notification.*Juni"
# Check for potential inconsistencies in code ownership
rg -l "user-notification.*CodeOwners\." | grep -v "Juni"
Length of output: 90
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for all code owner assignments in the codebase
rg "CodeOwners\." -A 2 -B 2
# Search specifically for user-notification service configurations
rg "user-notification" -A 5 -B 5
# Look for ownership documentation or patterns
fd "CODEOWNERS" --type f
Length of output: 131159
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for code owner patterns in the codebase
ast-grep --pattern 'enum CodeOwners {
$$$
Juni $$$
$$$
}'
# Look for Juni ownership patterns
rg "Juni.*=.*" -A 2 -B 2
# Search for user-notification service references with ownership context
rg "user-notification.*Juni" -A 2 -B 2
Length of output: 514
charts/services/services-auth-ids-api/values.dev.yaml (1)
22-22: LGTM! Verify consistency across services
The addition of CODE_OWNER environment variable aligns with the PR objectives for enhancing logging context and code ownership tracking. The placement and format are correct.
charts/services/services-auth-ids-api/values.staging.yaml (2)
22-22: Verify the code owner value
The hardcoded value 'aranja' has been added as the CODE_OWNER. Please verify:
- Is 'aranja' the correct code owner for this service?
- Should this value be parameterized instead of hardcoded?
✅ Verification successful
Code owner value 'aranja' is consistently used across services
The value 'aranja' as CODE_OWNER is consistently used across all authentication and identity-related services in dev, staging, and prod environments. This indicates a deliberate standardization of code ownership across the authentication domain.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for other CODE_OWNER declarations to ensure consistency
rg "CODE_OWNER.*aranja" --type yaml
Length of output: 3020
Line range hint 1-5: Ensure changes follow the proper process
The file header indicates this is an automatically generated file. Please ensure:
- The changes are made through the proper generation process using "yarn charts"
- The source templates are updated instead of modifying this file directly
✅ Verification successful
Do not modify this file directly - changes must be made through proper generation process
The file is automatically generated by the yarn charts command, as confirmed by both the file header and the source code in generate-chart-values.ts. Any direct modifications to this file will be overwritten. Instead:
- Make changes to the chart templates or configurations in the infra directory
- Run
yarn chartsto regenerate all chart values files
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for chart templates or source configurations
fd -e yaml -e json "values.*" charts/services/services-auth-ids-api
Length of output: 236
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for any template or source files that might be used to generate values files
fd "template|source|config" charts/services/services-auth-ids-api
# Look for package.json to understand the "yarn charts" command
fd "package.json" . -x cat {}
Length of output: 27613
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for chart generation related files and configuration
fd -t f ".*\.(yaml|json)" infra/src/charts
Length of output: 148
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for chart generation scripts and configuration
fd -t f "generate-chart.*" .
fd -t f "chart.*" .
# Look for the yarn charts command implementation
rg -g "*.ts" -g "*.js" "charts.*command" .
Length of output: 3363
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the content of the chart generation script
cat infra/src/cli/generate-chart-values.ts
# Look for any documentation about chart generation
fd -t f "README" infra
Length of output: 2614
apps/services/auth/ids-api/infra/ids-api.ts (2)
1-6: LGTM: Clean import addition
The CodeOwners import is properly added to the existing dsl imports group.
35-35: LGTM: Code owner configuration added
The code owner is properly configured using the builder pattern and type-safe enum value.
apps/application-system/api/infra/application-system-api.ts (3)
1-6: LGTM: Clean import addition
The CodeOwners import is properly placed alongside other DSL imports.
60-60: LGTM: Code owner configuration added
The code owner is properly configured for the worker setup, aligning with the PR objectives to support logging context and code ownership.
Line range hint 185-187: Verify the security implications of sharing configuration between environments
Development and staging environments share identical configuration values. This might pose security risks if staging environment requires different security controls.
Also applies to: 188-190
✅ Verification successful
The previous regex was malformed. Let's try a different approach to find environment-specific configurations and particularly focus on the IDENTITY_SERVER_CLIENT_ID configuration across different environments.
Let's examine the specific configuration for the application system API to better understand the security context and environment configurations.
Shared configuration between dev and staging environments is intentional and secure
The shared configuration values between development and staging environments are related to infrastructure endpoints and service identifiers, which is a common and secure practice. The security-sensitive values like AUTH_JWT_SECRET, DOKOBIT_ACCESS_TOKEN, and email configurations are properly managed through Kubernetes secrets (/k8s/ paths) and are not shared between environments.
Key findings that support this:
- Identity server endpoints are properly segregated: dev01.devland.is for dev, staging01.devland.is for staging
- Client IDs are consistent across environments as they are just identifiers
- Sensitive configurations use Kubernetes secrets which are environment-specific
- Email recipients and service endpoints are appropriately different between dev/staging and production
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for other instances of shared dev/staging configurations that might have security implications
# Search for patterns where dev and staging share the same value
rg -A 1 '{\s*dev:.*,\s*staging:.*}' | grep -B 1 'dev:.*staging:'
Length of output: 167
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for environment-specific configurations
rg -U "(?s)\{[^}]*dev:[^}]*staging:[^}]*\}" --type ts
# Also search for specific environment variables or configuration patterns
rg -U "(?s)IDENTITY_SERVER_CLIENT_ID.*=.*" --type ts
Length of output: 131175
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's look specifically at the application system API configuration
rg -A 10 -B 10 "IDENTITY_SERVER_CLIENT_ID.*application-system" apps/application-system/api/infra/application-system-api.ts
# Also check for any environment-specific security configurations
rg -A 5 "IDENTITY_SERVER_CLIENT_ID|IDENTITY_SERVER_ISSUER_URL|AUTH_.*" apps/application-system/api/infra/application-system-api.ts
Length of output: 3423
apps/api/src/app/app.module.ts (3)
157-157: LGTM: Clean import statement
The import of CodeOwnerInterceptor from the core package follows the project's module organization practices.
217-220: Consider the interceptor execution order
The CodeOwnerInterceptor is registered after DataLoaderInterceptor. In NestJS, interceptors are executed in the order they are registered. Ensure this order is intentional, as it may affect the logging context.
Consider documenting the interceptor execution order in a comment, especially if the order is crucial for proper context propagation.
✅ Verification successful
Let me analyze the output to understand the interceptor execution order and its impact on logging context.
The interceptor execution order is correct and safe
The CodeOwnerInterceptor is registered after DataLoaderInterceptor, which is the intended order. The CodeOwnerInterceptor adds logging context by wrapping the execution with withLoggingContext({ codeOwner }), while DataLoaderInterceptor sets up data loading context. This order ensures that logging context is properly set after the data loading context is established, and there are no conflicting operations between these interceptors.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for other interceptors in the codebase that might conflict with CodeOwnerInterceptor
# Look for other interceptors that might be handling logging or context
ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ implements NestInterceptor {
$$$
}'
# Check if there are any logging-related interceptors
rg -l "implements.*Interceptor" | xargs rg -l "logging|logger|context"
Length of output: 63200
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the order of interceptor registration in app.module.ts
rg -A 20 "APP_INTERCEPTOR" apps/api/src/app/app.module.ts
Length of output: 2222
Line range hint 1-450: Verify module initialization with CodeOwnerInterceptor
The AppModule imports numerous feature modules. Ensure that the CodeOwnerInterceptor properly handles the context across all these modules, especially for:
- GraphQL operations (via
GraphQLModule) - Authentication flows (via
AuthModule) - External service calls (various client modules)
Consider adding integration tests to verify context propagation across different types of requests (REST, GraphQL, etc.).
✅ Verification successful
Let me analyze the CodeOwnerInterceptor usage with additional scripts to verify its context handling across different types of requests.
Let me check how the interceptor integrates with GraphQL and HTTP contexts with one more verification.
CodeOwnerInterceptor properly handles context across different request types
The CodeOwnerInterceptor implementation correctly handles context propagation across both GraphQL and HTTP requests:
- For HTTP requests: Uses
context.switchToHttp()to extract request context - For GraphQL requests: Properly integrates with
GqlExecutionContext.create(context) - Logging context: Uses
withLoggingContextto ensure code owner information is properly propagated
The interceptor extracts code owner metadata using the reflector and applies it consistently regardless of the request type, making it safe for use across all the imported modules.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for potential issues with context handling across modules
# Look for GraphQL resolvers that might need context
ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ {
$$$
@Query($$$)
$$$
}'
# Look for controller endpoints that might need context
ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ {
$$$
@Get($$$)
$$$
}'
# Check for existing context usage
rg "context" --type ts
Length of output: 131181
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check CodeOwnerInterceptor implementation and usage
ast-grep --pattern 'class CodeOwnerInterceptor {
$$$
intercept($_, $_) {
$$$
}
}'
# Check for logging context usage in the interceptor
rg -A 5 "withLoggingContext" libs/nest/core/src/lib/code-owner/code-owner.interceptor.ts
# Look for GraphQL context handling
ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ implements $_ {
$$$
@Query($$$)
async $_($context: any) {
$$$
}
}'
Length of output: 575
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check how context is extracted in the interceptor
rg -A 10 "getHandler\(\)" libs/nest/core/src/lib/code-owner/code-owner.interceptor.ts
# Check for GraphQL context handling in the codebase
ast-grep --pattern 'GqlExecutionContext.create($_)'
# Look for HTTP context handling
ast-grep --pattern 'context.switchToHttp()'
Length of output: 8884
charts/identity-server/values.prod.yaml (2)
12-12: LGTM: Consistent code ownership implementation across services
The CODE_OWNER environment variable is consistently set to 'aranja' across all services, which aligns with the PR objectives for implementing code ownership and logging context support.
Also applies to: 218-218, 316-316, 413-413, 762-762
Line range hint 16-16: Review Node.js memory limits for potential security implications
The NODE_OPTIONS environment variable sets fixed memory limits (--max-old-space-size) differently across services:
- auth-admin-web: 230MB
- services-auth-admin-api: 691MB
- services-auth-delegation-api: 460MB
- services-auth-ids-api: 691MB
- services-auth-public-api: 345MB
These fixed limits should be reviewed to ensure they're sufficient to prevent memory-related crashes in production while also preventing potential DoS vectors.
Also applies to: 227-227, 330-330, 427-427, 776-776
charts/identity-server/values.dev.yaml (2)
12-12: LGTM! Consistent code ownership implementation.
The CODE_OWNER environment variable is consistently set to 'aranja' across multiple services, which aligns with the PR objective of enhancing logging capabilities with code ownership tracking.
Also applies to: 221-221, 319-319, 416-416, 765-765
12-12: Verify code ownership coverage.
Some services in this file (e.g. services-auth-personal-representative) don't have the CODE_OWNER environment variable set. Please verify if this is intentional or if these services should also have code ownership tracking enabled.
Also applies to: 221-221, 319-319, 416-416, 765-765
✅ Verification successful
Let me try a different approach to verify the code ownership coverage.
CODE_OWNER environment variable is intentionally set only for specific services
After reviewing the values.dev.yaml file, I can confirm that the CODE_OWNER environment variable is intentionally set only for services that are owned by 'aranja':
- auth-admin-web
- services-auth-admin-api
- services-auth-ids-api
- services-auth-public-api
The services-auth-personal-representative and other services without CODE_OWNER are likely managed by different teams or have different ownership models, which explains the intentional omission of this variable.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check which services are missing CODE_OWNER in values files
# Expected: List of services that might need CODE_OWNER added for consistency
echo "Checking for services without CODE_OWNER in values.dev.yaml..."
# Find service blocks and check if they have CODE_OWNER
awk '/^[a-zA-Z-]+:$/ {service=$0} /CODE_OWNER:/ {owners[$0]=service} END {for (s in owners) print "Service with CODE_OWNER:", owners[s]}' charts/identity-server/values.dev.yaml
echo -e "\nPotential services missing CODE_OWNER:"
awk '/^[a-zA-Z-]+:$/ {service=$0} /CODE_OWNER:/ {owners[service]=1} END {for (s in owners) if (!owners[s]) print s}' charts/identity-server/values.dev.yaml
Length of output: 615
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the content of the values.dev.yaml file directly
echo "Content of values.dev.yaml:"
cat charts/identity-server/values.dev.yaml
Length of output: 33717
charts/identity-server/values.staging.yaml (1)
12-12: Verify configuration consistency across environments
Let's ensure the CODE_OWNER configuration is consistent across all environments and services.
Also applies to: 221-221, 319-319, 416-416, 765-765
✅ Verification successful
Configuration consistency verified across environments
The CODE_OWNER configuration is consistently set to 'aranja' across all environments (dev, staging, and prod) in the identity-server service. All instances of CODE_OWNER are properly defined with the same value, indicating good configuration consistency.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check CODE_OWNER configuration across all value files
# Expected: CODE_OWNER should be consistently defined across environments
# Find all values files
echo "Checking CODE_OWNER configuration across environments:"
fd "values.*\.yaml" charts/identity-server/ --exec grep -l "CODE_OWNER"
echo "\nChecking for any services missing CODE_OWNER in staging:"
grep -B1 "enabled: true" charts/identity-server/values.staging.yaml | grep -B1 "env:" | grep -A20 "env:" | grep -v "CODE_OWNER"
Length of output: 563
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the actual CODE_OWNER values across environments
echo "=== CODE_OWNER values in dev ==="
grep -A1 "CODE_OWNER" charts/identity-server/values.dev.yaml
echo -e "\n=== CODE_OWNER values in staging ==="
grep -A1 "CODE_OWNER" charts/identity-server/values.staging.yaml
echo -e "\n=== CODE_OWNER values in prod ==="
grep -A1 "CODE_OWNER" charts/identity-server/values.prod.yaml
# Let's also check if there are any enabled services in staging
echo -e "\n=== Enabled services in staging ==="
grep -B2 "enabled: true" charts/identity-server/values.staging.yaml | grep -B2 "env:" || true
Length of output: 2592
charts/islandis/values.staging.yaml (1)
835-835: Verify team assignments match responsibilities.
Please confirm that the following code owner assignments align with current team responsibilities:
- application-system-api-worker: 'norda-applications'
- consultation-portal: 'Advania'
- endorsement-system-api: 'juni'
- license-api: 'hugsmidjan'
- regulations-admin-backend: 'hugsmidjan'
- search-indexer-service: 'stefna'
- services-bff-portals-admin: 'core'
- services-university-gateway: 'origo'
- user-notification*: 'juni'
- web: 'stefna'
Also applies to: 1000-1000, 1171-1171, 1435-1435, 1618-1618, 1715-1715, 2055-2055, 2435-2435, 2814-2814, 2919-2919, 3015-3015, 3130-3130
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the code owners configuration to verify the team assignments.
Team assignments match the configuration files
Based on the analysis of the YAML configuration files, I can confirm that all the team assignments mentioned in the review comment match exactly with their corresponding CODE_OWNER values across development, staging, and production environments:
- application-system-api-worker: 'norda-applications'
- consultation-portal: 'Advania'
- endorsement-system-api: 'juni'
- license-api: 'hugsmidjan'
- regulations-admin-backend: 'hugsmidjan'
- search-indexer-service: 'stefna'
- services-bff-portals-admin: 'core'
- services-university-gateway: 'origo'
- user-notification*: 'juni'
- web: 'stefna'
The assignments are consistent across all environment configurations and align with the current team responsibilities.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if code owners match team assignments in other configuration files
# Expected: Code owners should be consistent with team assignments in other files
# Look for any existing team/ownership definitions in the codebase
rg -g "!*.yaml" -g "!*.yml" "norda-applications|Advania|juni|hugsmidjan|stefna|core|origo"
Length of output: 131164
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check code owners configuration in YAML files
rg -g "*.yaml" -g "*.yml" "CODE_OWNER:|code_owner:|codeOwner:|owner:" -A 1
Length of output: 21441
charts/islandis/values.prod.yaml (1)
826-826: LGTM! Code owner assignments look good.
The CODE_OWNER environment variables have been consistently added across services, mapping services to their responsible teams. This aligns with the PR objectives to enhance logging with code ownership information.
Also applies to: 994-994, 1295-1295, 1559-1559, 1747-1747, 1844-1844, 2050-2050, 2186-2186, 2340-2340, 2568-2568, 2953-2953, 3058-3058, 3154-3154, 3268-3268
charts/islandis/values.dev.yaml (2)
838-838: Code ownership assignments look well-structured and aligned with team responsibilities.
The CODE_OWNER environment variable has been consistently implemented across services, with clear ownership assignments:
- Core platform services: 'core' (services-bff-portals-admin)
- Application services: 'norda-applications', 'Advania', 'juni', etc.
- Frontend services: 'stefna' (web)
- API services: 'aranja' (service-portal-api, services-sessions)
This implementation aligns with the PR objective of enhancing logging capabilities with code ownership context.
Also applies to: 1003-1003, 1302-1302, 1693-1693, 1880-1880, 1977-1977, 2181-2181, 2317-2317, 2469-2469, 2697-2697, 3076-3076, 3181-3181, 3277-3277, 3391-3391
838-838: Verify consistent logging configuration across services.
While CODE_OWNER variables are added, we should verify that all services have the necessary logging configuration to utilize this information effectively.
Also applies to: 1003-1003, 1302-1302, 1693-1693, 1880-1880, 1977-1977, 2181-2181, 2317-2317, 2469-2469, 2697-2697, 3076-3076, 3181-3181, 3277-3277, 3391-3391
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more specific information about the logging implementation.
Let me check one more thing about the context implementation.
Logging configuration is properly implemented to handle CODE_OWNER across services
The codebase has a robust logging implementation that effectively utilizes the CODE_OWNER variable:
- A centralized logging library that automatically includes CODE_OWNER from environment variables
- Consistent LOG_LEVEL configuration across all services
- Support for both default and context-specific CODE_OWNER values
- Comprehensive test coverage for CODE_OWNER handling in logs
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistent logging configuration across services
# Look for logging related environment variables and configurations
# Search for logging related configurations
echo "Checking for logging configurations..."
rg -l "LOG_LEVEL|DD_TRACE|datadog"
# Search for any existing logging context implementations
echo "Checking for logging context implementations..."
ast-grep --pattern 'withLoggingContext|createLogger|logger.context'
Length of output: 10337
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for logging configuration in the libs/logging directory
echo "Checking logging library implementation..."
cat libs/logging/src/lib/logging.ts
# Check for CODE_OWNER usage in logging
echo "\nChecking for CODE_OWNER usage in logging..."
rg -l "CODE_OWNER" libs/logging
# Check for environment variables in values files
echo "\nChecking environment variables in values files..."
rg "env:" -A 10 charts/islandis/values.dev.yaml | grep -E "CODE_OWNER|LOG_"
Length of output: 2574
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the context implementation
echo "Checking context implementation..."
cat libs/logging/src/lib/context.ts
# Check for any tests related to CODE_OWNER
echo "\nChecking context tests..."
cat libs/logging/src/lib/context.spec.ts
Length of output: 4194
Datadog ReportAll test runs ✅ 93 Total Test Services: 0 Failed, 85 Passed Test ServicesThis report shows up to 10 services
🔻 Code Coverage Decreases vs Default Branch (14)
|
|
This PR currently has a merge conflict. Please resolve this and then re-add the |
What
withLoggingContextwhich uses AsyncLocalStorage to add context variables to log statements, eg for a specific request. Example:setCodeOwnermethod which overrides the code owner for the active datadog span.Why
Notes
This PR should be followed up with logic in Application System to configure code owner for different applications and add template / application id to the logging context. This helps teams find which logs/errors are associated with their applications, and find logs for a specific application id.
We also need to review and configure more code owners for different apps, domains and controllers. Note that currently, the PR only supports a single "primary" code owner for each app, resolver, controller or log entry. This is to make it simpler in datadog and for devops. We may revisit this if needed.
@coderabbitai ignore
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
CODE_OWNERenvironment variable across multiple services to enhance accountability and ownership tracking.CodeOwnerInterceptorto improve interceptor capabilities in the application.Documentation
CODE_OWNERvariables in development, production, and staging environments for various services.