Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Teradata logmech should also support LDAP #339

Closed
wt1309 opened this issue Oct 27, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #347
Closed

Teradata logmech should also support LDAP #339

wt1309 opened this issue Oct 27, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #347
Assignees
@wanting4
Labels
priority: p1 High priority. Fix may be included in the next release. Release Next release candidate type: feature request 'Nice-to-have' improvement, new feature or different behavior or design.

Comments

@wt1309
Copy link

wt1309 commented Oct 27, 2021

In order to support LDAP logmech, changes were made on 3 files:

third_party/ibis/ibis_teradata/client.py
LINE:69 - Added: logmech
LINE:85 - Added: "logmech": logmech,

third_party/ibis/ibis_teradata/api.py
LINE:46 - Added: logmech: str
LINE:64 - Added: logmech

data_validation/cli_tools.py
LINE:66 - Added: ["logmech", "Logon Mechanism"]
@nehanene15 nehanene15 added priority: p1 High priority. Fix may be included in the next release. Release Next release candidate type: feature request 'Nice-to-have' improvement, new feature or different behavior or design. labels Nov 9, 2021
@wanting4 wanting4 mentioned this issue Nov 19, 2021
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@wanting4 wanting4

Labels
priority: p1 High priority. Fix may be included in the next release. Release Next release candidate type: feature request 'Nice-to-have' improvement, new feature or different behavior or design.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

feat: Issue339 ldap logmech GoogleCloudPlatform/professional-services-data-validator
3 participants
@nehanene15 @wanting4 @wt1309