Skip to content

http: tidy up exposure of header validation - #33371

Closed
osher wants to merge 1 commit into
nodejs:masterfrom
osher:patch-1.1
Closed

http: tidy up exposure of header validation#33371
osher wants to merge 1 commit into
nodejs:masterfrom
osher:patch-1.1

Conversation

@osher

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Internal refactoring, following:
Following: #33119 (comment)

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • tests and/or benchmarks are included
  • documentation is changed or added
  • commit message follows commit guidelines

@osher

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Ha. the change is completely internal - the tests even did not have to change 😀

@osher

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@mscdex, @addaleax - as promised :)

@osher
osher marked this pull request as ready for review May 12, 2020 15:33
@osher

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

mm. donno why the commit list is noisy...
I was following https://help.github.com/en/github/collaborating-with-issues-and-pull-requests/syncing-a-fork

(first one on this for me as well, all my PRs so far started with editing a file online, and cloning the auto-generated repo)

if I'm doing something wrong - tell me, I'll fix it. even create a new PR if need be.

@addaleax

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@osher Yes, we don’t do merge commits, and it’s unfortunate that the official Github docs don’t mention that git rebase may be preferential to git merge. In particular, our CI may fail if there are merge commits. (I’ll start one anyway because I don’t think this merge commit resolves a conflict, which is what I think would throw off CI, but it might fail anyway.)

If CI works, then I think you don’t need to update anything. If it doesn’t, you’ll need to update the branch again, but this time using git rebase rather than git merge.

@addaleaxaddaleax added the http Issues or PRs related to the http subsystem. label May 12, 2020
@nodejs-github-bot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Comment threadlib/_http_outgoing.js Outdated

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess this makes this patch semver-major?

@osherosherMay 14, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@lpinca - good spot. Here's the thing:

this line landed just about a week ago, and was decided to be done better as it is featured now in a discussion that continued after the landing in a friendly spirit.
It was also undocumented - it's an implementation detail.

If that's a problem - then I can leave that line.
LMK how to proceed.

@osher

osher commented May 14, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

If CI works, then I think you don’t need to update anything. If it doesn’t, you’ll need to update the branch again, but this time using git rebase rather than git merge.

@addaleax

I updated the branch, just to learn how to do it. (edited: I think it also failed CI)
pls LMK if I'm on target or not...

What I basically did was

  1. since all changes are in a single commit - I created a patch from it using:
git format-patch -1 HEAD
  1. checkout the last commit from master, one before that auto-merge
  2. create a tmp branch on it, and apply the patch to it using
git am < 0001-http-tidy-up-exposure-of-header-validation.patch

(that's the file name I got)
4. validate the patch is there using git log
5. delete patch-1.1 and create it on tmp, and delete the tmp local branch.
6. force push patch-1.1

cheers

@BridgeARBridgeAR added the author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. label May 23, 2020
@nodejs-github-bot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@nodejs-github-bot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@nodejs-github-bot

nodejs-github-bot commented May 24, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

BridgeAR pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 25, 2020
PR-URL: #33371
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
@BridgeAR

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Landed in e30a651

codebytere pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 18, 2020
PR-URL: #33371
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
@codebyterecodebytere mentioned this pull request Jun 28, 2020
codebytere pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 30, 2020
PR-URL: #33371
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

author readyPRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started.httpIssues or PRs related to the http subsystem.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants

@osher@addaleax@nodejs-github-bot@BridgeAR@benjamingr@lpinca@codebytere