<@U9UUY3CU9> <@U5FCZAAUU> We were having a discuss...
# libpact_ffi-usersa
Adam Rodger (pact-net)
05/26/2022, 7:58 PM@Matt (pactflow.io / pact-js / pact-go) @uglyog We were having a discussion about publishing verification results when using non-broker sources on the pact-net channel. Someone had asked because the CI/CD guidelines recommend that a verification job be invoked with a changed pact URI (linked to the broker), which you then verify via a URL source (not a broker source) and publish the verification results back.
The user was surprised that PactNet didn't support this option, but in the thread I explained that you can't publish verification results because you don't know the broker URL (and potentially credentials also). I raised an enhancement request and I've already pushed up a draft MR for it, but unfortunately at the moment it can't progress.
I've checked the FFI and it doesn't support publishing verification results for anything other than broker sources:
https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-reference/blob/e32caf8defd399029dcdf09c5d9298a1fe71d75a/rust/pact_verifier/src/lib.rs#L1207-L1228
If I call
set_publish_optionsAdam Rodger (pact-net)
05/26/2022, 8:05 PMSo I think the only safe/robust thing to do if we want to support this (and given the CI/CD guide says it's the recommended way of doing it...) is that the user is forced to specify the broker URL in the publish options at the FFI boundary. We can design nicer library APIs on top of that, but fundamentally you can't just assume the host of the URI is also the host of the broker.
Adam Rodger (pact-net)
05/26/2022, 8:07 PMe.g. the broker could be running on a sub-path instead of a dedicated sub-domain, like
<https://ci.example.org/broker>/pacts/<https://ci.example.org/pacts>b
Beth (pactflow.io/Pact Broker/pact-ruby)
05/27/2022, 6:44 AM
I have answered on the issue.