3 Commits (5ef3713c9fb0896fee566918d9f5f932c66086d9)

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Brad Fitzpatrick	5ef3713c9f	cmd/vet: add subtestnames analyzer; fix all existing violations ... Add a new vet analyzer that checks t.Run subtest names don't contain characters requiring quoting when re-running via "go test -run". This enforces the style guide rule: don't use spaces or punctuation in subtest names. The analyzer flags: - Direct t.Run calls with string literal names containing spaces, regex metacharacters, quotes, or other problematic characters - Table-driven t.Run(tt.name, ...) calls where tt ranges over a slice/map literal with bad name field values Also fix all 978 existing violations across 81 test files, replacing spaces with hyphens and shortening long sentence-like names to concise hyphenated forms. Updates #19242 Change-Id: Ib0ad96a111bd8e764582d1d4902fe2599454ab65 Signed-off-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@tailscale.com>	2 weeks ago
Will Norris	3ec5be3f51	all: remove AUTHORS file and references to it ... This file was never truly necessary and has never actually been used in the history of Tailscale's open source releases. A Brief History of AUTHORS files --- The AUTHORS file was a pattern developed at Google, originally for Chromium, then adopted by Go and a bunch of other projects. The problem was that Chromium originally had a copyright line only recognizing Google as the copyright holder. Because Google (and most open source projects) do not require copyright assignemnt for contributions, each contributor maintains their copyright. Some large corporate contributors then tried to add their own name to the copyright line in the LICENSE file or in file headers. This quickly becomes unwieldy, and puts a tremendous burden on anyone building on top of Chromium, since the license requires that they keep all copyright lines intact. The compromise was to create an AUTHORS file that would list all of the copyright holders. The LICENSE file and source file headers would then include that list by reference, listing the copyright holder as "The Chromium Authors". This also become cumbersome to simply keep the file up to date with a high rate of new contributors. Plus it's not always obvious who the copyright holder is. Sometimes it is the individual making the contribution, but many times it may be their employer. There is no way for the proejct maintainer to know. Eventually, Google changed their policy to no longer recommend trying to keep the AUTHORS file up to date proactively, and instead to only add to it when requested: https://opensource.google/docs/releasing/authors. They are also clear that: > Adding contributors to the AUTHORS file is entirely within the > project's discretion and has no implications for copyright ownership. It was primarily added to appease a small number of large contributors that insisted that they be recognized as copyright holders (which was entirely their right to do). But it's not truly necessary, and not even the most accurate way of identifying contributors and/or copyright holders. In practice, we've never added anyone to our AUTHORS file. It only lists Tailscale, so it's not really serving any purpose. It also causes confusion because Tailscalars put the "Tailscale Inc & AUTHORS" header in other open source repos which don't actually have an AUTHORS file, so it's ambiguous what that means. Instead, we just acknowledge that the contributors to Tailscale (whoever they are) are copyright holders for their individual contributions. We also have the benefit of using the DCO (developercertificate.org) which provides some additional certification of their right to make the contribution. The source file changes were purely mechanical with: git ls-files | xargs sed -i -e 's/\(Tailscale Inc &\) AUTHORS/\1 contributors/g' Updates #cleanup Change-Id: Ia101a4a3005adb9118051b3416f5a64a4a45987d Signed-off-by: Will Norris <will@tailscale.com>	3 months ago
David Bond	2cb86cf65e	cmd/k8s-operator,k8s-operator: Allow the use of multiple tailnets (#18344) ... This commit contains the implementation of multi-tailnet support within the Kubernetes Operator Each of our custom resources now expose the `spec.tailnet` field. This field is a string that must match the name of an existing `Tailnet` resource. A `Tailnet` resource looks like this: ```yaml apiVersion: tailscale.com/v1alpha1 kind: Tailnet metadata: name: example # This is the name that must be referenced by other resources spec: credentials: secretName: example-oauth ``` Each `Tailnet` references a `Secret` resource that contains a set of oauth credentials. This secret must be created in the same namespace as the operator: ```yaml apiVersion: v1 kind: Secret metadata: name: example-oauth # This is the name that's referenced by the Tailnet resource. namespace: tailscale stringData: client_id: "client-id" client_secret: "client-secret" ``` When created, the operator performs a basic check that the oauth client has access to all required scopes. This is done using read actions on devices, keys & services. While this doesn't capture a missing "write" permission, it catches completely missing permissions. Once this check passes, the `Tailnet` moves into a ready state and can be referenced. Attempting to use a `Tailnet` in a non-ready state will stall the deployment of `Connector`s, `ProxyGroup`s and `Recorder`s until the `Tailnet` becomes ready. The `spec.tailnet` field informs the operator that a `Connector`, `ProxyGroup`, or `Recorder` must be given an auth key generated using the specified oauth client. For backwards compatibility, the set of credentials the operator is configured with are considered the default. That is, where `spec.tailnet` is not set, the resource will be deployed in the same tailnet as the operator. Updates https://github.com/tailscale/corp/issues/34561	3 months ago