Skip to content

Conversation

@jogold
Copy link
Owner

@jogold jogold commented Dec 30, 2025

Use a durable Lambda function instead of a Step Function.

Switch to the API v4. Now requires an registered email.

BREAKING CHANGE: SslServerTest now requires a registrationEmail to run.

@gemini-code-assist
Copy link

Summary of Changes

Hello @jogold, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request significantly refactors the ssl-server-test construct by migrating its core logic from an AWS Step Functions state machine to a durable AWS Lambda function. This change aims to simplify the architecture, streamline the SSL analysis process, and leverage the capabilities of the Durable Execution SDK for managing long-running operations. Additionally, it includes routine dependency updates and runtime upgrades for several Lambda functions.

Highlights

  • Refactor SSL Server Test: The ssl-server-test construct has been refactored to utilize a durable AWS Lambda function instead of an AWS Step Functions state machine for performing SSL server tests. This change consolidates the analysis and grade extraction logic into a single Lambda function.
  • Dependency Updates: The project's dependencies have been updated, including aws-cdk-lib to version 2.232.0. New dependencies for the AWS Durable Execution SDK (for both runtime and testing) and the AWS SDK SNS client have been added.
  • Lambda Runtime Upgrade: Several Lambda functions across the project have been updated to use the nodejs22.x runtime, upgrading from nodejs18.x.
  • Snapshot and Configuration Updates: Various snapshot files, ESLint configurations, Git attributes, and Projen configuration files have been updated to reflect the removal of the extract-grade Lambda and the new durable Lambda architecture.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request refactors the SslServerTest construct to use a durable Lambda function instead of a Step Function state machine, which simplifies the architecture. The changes look good overall, and the dependencies have been updated accordingly. I've found a bug where a new property is not being used and a potential robustness issue in the new Lambda function. I've also spotted a minor typo in the documentation.

jogold and others added 5 commits December 30, 2025 23:17
Co-authored-by: gemini-code-assist[bot] <176961590+gemini-code-assist[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
@jogold jogold marked this pull request as ready for review January 1, 2026 15:51
@jogold
Copy link
Owner Author

jogold commented Jan 1, 2026

/gemini review

Copy link

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request successfully refactors the SslServerTest to use a durable Lambda function with the @aws/durable-execution-sdk-js instead of a Step Function. This simplifies the architecture. The update to SSL Labs API v4 and the associated breaking change requiring a registrationEmail are clearly communicated. The code changes are well-implemented, and the new tests for the durable lambda are comprehensive. I have a few suggestions to improve code clarity and a question about a potential workaround related to the CDK version upgrade.

@jogold jogold enabled auto-merge (squash) January 1, 2026 16:11
@jogold jogold merged commit 9249546 into master Jan 1, 2026
8 of 12 checks passed
@jogold jogold deleted the ssl-durable branch January 1, 2026 16:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants