[enhancement] allow raw responses about webhook HOT 7 CLOSED

I think you log stderr and only return stdout.

from webhook.

Thanks @adnanh, this change makes a real difference! I tested it just now and would like to ask you two things:

1. What do you think of including the output of failed commands just as it's done for the succeeded ones? I added exit 42 to my run.sh and started getting 500 as expected. At the same time, I stopped seeing all the nice output I expected before the last (malformed) command. Webhooks are often used in CI scripts and it's useful to see why a particular build has failed without going to the production server and scrolling through the logs.
2. I've noticed that response-message is not showing when include-command-output-in-response is set to true. The build script I have is checking the result of the webhook against the presence of a response message and considers itself successful only if it is found. I know that I can use HTTP 200/500 for the same check now when include-command-output-in-response is on, but the current behaviour is still not intuitively obvious. An extra check can be useful e.g. to protect yourself from the webhook endpoint being replaced with smth else that always returns 200. How about appending response-message on success in all cases and thus remove a not-very-intuitive side-effect of include-command-output-in-response?

Thanks again for your work on this project! It's one of those nice little things that make people's lives better :-)

from webhook.

Hello :-)

Regarding the point number 1:
I propose adding a flag to include stdout & stderror in failed executions and leave the current behavior as default.

Regarding the point number 2:
You could wrap your command in a script that echoes your string to stdout and then runs the original command, and you have restored the old functionality. :-)

Having said that, I personally believe that the described use-case should be modified to use headers as a transport of such details.

You can define custom response headers on hook execution using response-headers setting in hooks.json, or on all hooks by using -header flag when starting webhook (you can find more details about those fields & flags on the wiki pages). i.e. you could set 'X-Served-By' header to return 'webhook' and check for it's existence in your build script, rather than mixing custom response message & the command output.

Cheers!

from webhook.

I have a potential fix in my repo, but I can't create a PR against the development branch because dev is behind master (merge conflicts). @adnanh, once you get the dev branch in sync, I can create a PR.

from webhook.

What to do with stderr? Should it be merged with stdout, or just print out the stdout without stderr?

from webhook.

This will be added in 2.5.0.

include-command-output-in-response flag will now make webhook return raw stdout and log stderr.

from webhook.

Hey @adnanh,

I would like to make sure: you proposal from point 1 was not implemented, right? As of now if you return exit code != 0 and use include-command-output-in-response then you lose the output?

from webhook.