fix(functions): Set serviceAccount for Cloud Functions when custom service account is specified

[HassanBahati]

Fixes 8841

Description

When deploying Cloud Functions v2 with a custom service account specified via setGlobalOptions({ serviceAccount: "..." }), the Firebase CLI fails if the default compute service account has been deleted.

Scenarios Tested

• Custom SA sets both buildConfig.serviceAccount and serviceConfig.serviceAccountEmail
• Shorthand SA notation (sa@) expands correctly
• serviceAccount: null sets both fields to null
• No SA specified — buildConfig.serviceAccount is omitted

Sample Commands

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @HassanBahati, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses a critical deployment failure for Cloud Functions v2 by ensuring that custom service accounts are properly applied to the function's build configuration. This change prevents issues arising from the absence of a default compute service account, making deployments more robust when specific service accounts are mandated.

Highlights

• Bug Fix: Resolves an issue where deploying Cloud Functions v2 with a custom service account would fail if the default compute service account had been deleted.
• Service Account Configuration: Ensures that the buildConfig.serviceAccount field is correctly set for Cloud Functions when a custom service account is specified, allowing the build process to use the designated service account.
• Code Changes: The BuildConfig interface in cloudfunctionsv2.ts now includes an optional serviceAccount field, and the functionFromEndpoint utility has been updated to populate this field based on the endpoint's service account.
• Testing: New test cases have been added to cloudfunctionsv2.spec.ts to validate the correct assignment of buildConfig.serviceAccount when a custom service account is provided.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request correctly fixes an issue where a custom service account was not being applied to the build configuration for Cloud Functions v2 deployments. The changes are logical, and the accompanying tests are thorough, covering various scenarios including null, shorthand, and full service account specifications. I have one suggestion to improve code consistency, but overall, this is a solid contribution that addresses the reported bug effectively.

[cabljac]

/gemini

[gemini-code-assist]

It looks like you tried to invoke a command, but you didn't specify which one. Please use /gemini <command> with one of the following commands:

• /gemini review: Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
• /gemini summary: Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
• /gemini help: Displays a list of available commands.

[cabljac]

/gemini review

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request fixes an issue where Cloud Functions v2 deployments with a custom service account would fail. The fix involves correctly setting the serviceAccount property in the buildConfig of the function. The changes look good and are well-tested.

I've added a couple of suggestions to improve code maintainability by reducing duplication in both the implementation and the tests. One suggestion is to refactor the service account handling to avoid repetitive logic, and the other is to remove a redundant test case.

Overall, this is a solid fix for an important bug.

[HassanBahati]

/gemini review

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request addresses a bug where the service account for the build process was not being set for Cloud Functions v2, leading to deployment failures when the default compute service account is unavailable. The changes correctly set both buildConfig.serviceAccount and serviceConfig.serviceAccountEmail when a custom service account is specified in the function options. The implementation properly handles setting, unsetting (with null), and expanding shorthand service account notations. The accompanying test updates are thorough and validate the new behavior. The changes are well-implemented and directly resolve the reported issue.