Skip to content

chore: update for mrk support in keystore #267

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Apr 19, 2024
Merged

Conversation

ajewellamz
Copy link
Contributor

Issue #, if available:

Description of changes:

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

Check any applicable:

  • Were any files moved? Moving files changes their URL, which breaks all hyperlinks to the files.

@ajewellamz ajewellamz requested a review from a team as a code owner April 19, 2024 13:37
Copy link
Contributor

@josecorella josecorella left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

looks good!
before approving, let's get someone else to review and change the PR title to be compliant with semantic commits

@ajewellamz ajewellamz changed the title update for mrk support in keystore chore: update for mrk support in keystore Apr 19, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@kessplas kessplas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@ajewellamz ajewellamz merged commit 0d4d63c into master Apr 19, 2024
@ajewellamz ajewellamz deleted the ajewell/hierarchy-mrk branch April 19, 2024 19:06
@texastony
Copy link
Contributor

@ajewellamz Did the "no admin actions" change get in here?
I do not see them.

seebees added a commit that referenced this pull request May 7, 2025
Discovery and chainging the region of a KMS key
on decrypt do not mutate the customer input.
This aligns with customer intent.
Further the behavior of the code is to use the provided key directly

#267 underspecified how branch keys should be created
so this PR rolls back that change.
seebees added a commit that referenced this pull request May 7, 2025
Discovery and changing the region of a KMS key
on decrypt do not mutate the customer input.
This aligns with customer intent.
Further the behavior of the code is to use the provided key directly

#267 underspecified how branch keys should be created
so this PR rolls back that change.
seebees added a commit that referenced this pull request May 7, 2025
Discovery and changing the region of a KMS key
on decrypt do not mutate the customer input.
This aligns with customer intent.
Further the behavior of the code is to use the provided key directly

#267 underspecified how branch keys should be created
so this PR rolls back that change.
texastony pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 20, 2025
Discovery and changing the region of a KMS key
on decrypt do not mutate the customer input.
This aligns with customer intent.
Further the behavior of the code is to use the provided key directly

#267 underspecified how branch keys should be created
so this PR rolls back that change.
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.

5 participants