-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 127
Migrate to CloudFunctions v1 API. #165
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Migrate to CloudFunctions v1 API. #165
Conversation
- 'location' property migrate to 'parent'. - Use 'entryPoint' property to specify handler function. - Use 'function' property for stage-distinct function name.
@pmuens Is this plugin no more maintained? |
Would be good to get this merged... |
Awesome, really looking forward to this! |
I think so. |
Hi, is this plugin maintained ? |
Hey! Any update? |
Hey, are you planning to move this PR forward? Google is pushing people to migrate from beta API |
@mather Any chance you solve the conflicts in this branch, so that it may can get finally merged? |
Can please help get it merged asap ? |
Google sent notification to force use v1. In June 2018, we announced Cloud Functions v1beta2 API version will be shut down on December 4, 2018. In order to give customers more time to migrate, we extended the deadline and we are now writing to let you know that the Google Cloud Functions v1beta2 API version will be shut down on April 15, 2020. We are writing to remind you that your projects have recently made calls to the Cloud Functions v1beta2 API. Please upgrade to Cloud Functions v1 API by April 15, 2020. Google Cloud Functions v1 API has been available since October 2017. |
@mather can you please help resolve the conflicts and have this PR merged ? we're in really need to use v1 cloudfunction. |
Conflicts: info/lib/displayServiceInfo.js package/lib/compileFunctions.js package/lib/compileFunctions.test.js
I have resolved conflicts. Anyone can review this PR? |
When does Coveralls finish coverage tests...? |
@mather We're going to take this now. I understand it's a breaking change (?) |
It seems passed coverage tests already 🤔 |
Why it still says merging is blocked ? @KhadijaBenAmmar @medikoo |
@IamGabrielWu I'm happy to merge and publish it now. There's just one thing I want to be sure of: I understand that it's a (semver wise) breaking change, and requires bump of major to v3 (?) |
Umm. I think this is minor update because this update doesn't have any interface modification on user side. |
It's published with v2.4.2 Sorry for delay! |
@medikoo Thank you for moving this forward. I've already tried to upgrade our existing GCFs to new version and got error:
Googling around did not pointed to anything, but seems like it is because of the version change. Do you have any idea what could be a reason of this issue? |
It might be then that it requires creation of a stack from a start (I'm not that familiar with Google Cloud), but if it's the case. then this change should be reverted in context of v2, and published with v3 as breaking. Before I do that, I'd love other users to confirm |
yes, seems like it is the case, I've just tried to deploy function with different name (meaning create new one) and it worked well. thx |
Sure. |
Thanks for the workaround, we will try to research solution to fix that migration challenge @paladiy |
anybody gets this error after 2nd time deployment using this v1 api ? |
…)" This reverts commit 59fe8ce.
Got error "The GCF v1beta2 API is deprecated" Solved by
|
Motivation
We should use v1 API asap.
Changes
location
property migrate toparent
.entryPoint
property to specify handler function.function
property for stage-distinct function name to avoid confusion of function name in GCP console and confliction ofhttp
event endpoint URL.Related Issues
#105