add modeled endpoint resolver generation #456
Conversation
| @@ -63,6 +63,7 @@ public final class SmithyGoDependency { | |||
| public static final GoDependency SMITHY_DOCUMENT = smithy("document", "smithydocument"); | |||
| public static final GoDependency SMITHY_DOCUMENT_JSON = smithy("document/json", "smithydocumentjson"); | |||
| public static final GoDependency SMITHY_SYNC = smithy("sync", "smithysync"); | |||
| public static final GoDependency SMITHY_AUTH = smithy("auth"); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: do we want to alias this as smithyauth? since we do that in a lot of other places, and maybe consuming applications want to use auth?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is just for our own importation of it though, it doesn't affect how other people choose to alias it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe I misunderstood what you're saying - I'm fine with smithyauth regardless.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // NewSigV4AScheme returns a SigV4A auth scheme that uses the given Signer. | ||
| func NewSigV4AScheme(signer Signer) AuthScheme { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
looking at the Signer interface, it looks fairly generic. yet the SRA spec states that the SigV4 and SigV4A auth scheme have SigV4 and SigV4A specific signer types. is the spec mistaken?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Where are you seeing that? Let's discuss offline.
AuthSchemeDefinition, which controls codegen of runtime componentsauth.Option,auth.Identity,auth.IdentityResolvertransport/http.AuthScheme,transport/http.Signer