Skip to content

docs(proposals): add How? for pipeline info admin endpoint (#796) - #899

Open
henschwartz wants to merge 1 commit into
praxis-proxy:mainfrom
henschwartz:docs/proposal-00796-how
Open

docs(proposals): add How? for pipeline info admin endpoint (#796)#899
henschwartz wants to merge 1 commit into
praxis-proxy:mainfrom
henschwartz:docs/proposal-00796-how

Conversation

@henschwartz

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

  • Adds the ## How? section to docs/proposals/00796_pipeline-info-admin-endpoint.md after What?/Why? (docs(proposals): add pipeline info admin endpoint proposal #823) landed.
  • Captures Tim’s review Decisions as an implementation plan: GET /api/pipelines on existing PingoraAdminService, serde_json, loopback/allow_public_admin, ListenerPipelines as live source, chain_names[], empty filters: [] / filter_count: 0, and cheap per-listener queries.
  • Describes required FilterPipeline introspection, example JSON shape, reload edge cases, and unit/integration test plan for a future implementing PR.

Test plan

  • Confirm proposal still matches docs(proposals): add pipeline info admin endpoint proposal #823 Decisions (authz, empty chains, per-listener, admin exclusion)
  • Confirm How? does not claim an implementing PR yet (placeholder until code lands)
  • Confirm CI proposal-check allows How? on this follow-up (file is modified, not newly added)

Related: #796, #793 (praxisctl pipelines consumer later).

@henschwartz
henschwartz requested a review from a team August 2, 2026 07:49
@henschwartz
henschwartz requested a review from shaneutt as a code owner August 2, 2026 07:49
@henschwartz
henschwartz requested a review from twghu August 2, 2026 07:50
@shaneutt shaneutt added this to the v0.5.2 milestone Aug 3, 2026

@praxis-bot praxis-bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Review: docs(proposals): add How? for pipeline info admin endpoint (#796)

Solid design section that aligns well with the existing PingoraAdminService architecture and the codebase's ListenerPipelines / ArcSwap<FilterPipeline> patterns. The technical claims about file paths, type names, trait methods, and admin exclusion are all accurate against the current codebase.

Severity Count
Large 1
Medium 3

All findings have inline comments below.

Comment thread docs/proposals/00796_pipeline-info-admin-endpoint.md Outdated
Comment thread docs/proposals/00796_pipeline-info-admin-endpoint.md Outdated
Comment thread docs/proposals/00796_pipeline-info-admin-endpoint.md
Comment thread docs/proposals/00796_pipeline-info-admin-endpoint.md Outdated
…oxy#796)

Describe GET /api/pipelines via existing admin dispatch,
FilterPipeline introspection, JSON shape, and test plan.

Signed-off-by: Hen Schwartz <hschwart@redhat.com>
@henschwartz
henschwartz force-pushed the docs/proposal-00796-how branch from 34778d6 to ac10b2a Compare August 4, 2026 08:14
@shaneutt shaneutt assigned shaneutt and unassigned aslakknutsen Aug 4, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

Status: Review

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants