Fix get_credentials, and move it to request #170
Merged
+95
−64
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
I don't think this would've ever worked if passed a RunFunctionRequest due to the way field presence works in most protobuf messages. In practice I can't think why req would ever be a Struct and not a RunFunctionRequest. Signed-off-by: Nic Cope <[email protected]>
bobh66
approved these changes
Aug 5, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description of your changes
Fixes #137
I don't think this would've ever worked if passed a RunFunctionRequest due to the way field presence works in most protobuf messages. In practice I can't think why req would ever be a Struct and not a RunFunctionRequest.
CC @bobh66 has this been working for you? Looks like you added this and I reviewed it, but I missed that
reqwouldn't be a struct in practice.I have: