(PUP-11123) make Function unwrap more tolerant

[cocker-cc]

• as there is no Function unwrap_if_necessary() we make the Function unwrap()
  more tolerant and let it return a non-sensitive Value just like it is

[joshcooper]

Hi @cocker-cc, thanks for submitting a pull request! Can you provide more detail about your use case? Is the value originating in hiera or in a different module?

[cocker-cc]

Hi @cocker-cc, thanks for submitting a pull request! Can you provide more detail about your use case? Is the value originating in hiera or in a different module?

In the Process of transitioning several Component-Modules to be sensitive-aware, but stay backwards-compatible, I frequently have a Block like:

class blubb(
…
  Variant[String, [Sensitive[String]] $password,
…
) {
  $password_unsensitive = if $password =~ Sensitive {
    $password.unwrap
  } else {
    $password
  }
}

With the suggested Pullrequest this would reduce to just

  $password_unsensitive = $password.unwrap

[ekohl]

I also thought about this. It would certainly be useful to be able to treat Sensitive[String] and String the same in code. Right now I consider Sensitive mostly useless and just a painful thing which is why I've never bothered to use it. Being able to say "I need the raw value now, I know what I'm doing" vs "just log what you have and if it's sensitive, obscure the value" can certainly be a step in the right direction.

[joshcooper]

Thanks for your contribution @cocker-cc! Could you file a JIRA ticket in the PUP project and git commit --amend your commit summary with (PUP-XXX) ... This is necessary for our release automation.

Also I wanted to note that Sensitive.new accepts either Sensitive or Any, so it makes sense that its inverse (unwrap) does the same.

[cocker-cc]

Could you file a JIRA ticket in the PUP project and git commit --amend your commit summary with (PUP-XXX) ... This is necessary for our release automation.

Done.

Also I wanted to note that Sensitive.new accepts either Sensitive or Any, so it makes sense that its inverse (unwrap) does the same.

Great. I copied the Variablenames from there to keep it consistent.

[joshcooper]

LGTM. Note main branch is for 7.x releases. I'd be fine releasing this in 6.x, you'd just need to retarget your PR against the 6.x branch.

[cocker-cc]

Note main branch is for 7.x releases. I'd be fine releasing this in 6.x, you'd just need to retarget your PR against the 6.x branch.

I rebased it against 6.x and changed the Merge-Target.

[ekohl]

This was merged to 6.x, but it should also be in main. In fact, normally I'd say that it should first be merged to main and then cherry picked to 6.x.

[GabrielNagy]

@ekohl we have automation that promotes/merges up commits from 6.x to main once our internal nightly acceptance CI passes

[joshcooper]

Thanks for your contribution @cocker-cc! This should be released in the next set of releases in July.