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.

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

tls: rename validateKeyCert in _tls_common.js #28116

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

danbev
Copy link
Contributor

@danbev danbev commented Jun 7, 2019

This commit renames validateKeyCert to validateKeyCertArg to avoid
confusing this with something that would validate the actual key or
certificate.

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • commit message follows commit guidelines

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

nodejs-github-bot commented Jun 7, 2019

Sadly, an error occurred when I tried to trigger a build. :(
CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/23843/

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added the tls Issues and PRs related to the tls subsystem. label Jun 7, 2019
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@mscdex
Copy link
Contributor

mscdex commented Jun 7, 2019

s/_tls_commons/_tls_common/ in commit message

@mscdex
Copy link
Contributor

mscdex commented Jun 7, 2019

Also I think the subsystem prefix should be tls: instead of crypto:.

This commit renames validateKeyCert to validateKeyCertArg to avoid
confusing this with something that would validate the actual key or
certificate.
@danbev
Copy link
Contributor Author

danbev commented Jun 7, 2019

@mscdex Thanks, I've fixed both issues now.

@danbev danbev changed the title crypto: rename validateKeyCert in _tls_commons.js tls: rename validateKeyCert in _tls_common.js Jun 7, 2019
@sam-github
Copy link
Contributor

I'm fine with this, as-is, but maybe validateKeyOrCertOption() would be more accurate? It's not being validated that its the key's cert, and its passed as an option, not an arg (though the error is ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE).

@danbev
Copy link
Contributor Author

danbev commented Jun 10, 2019

I'm fine with this, as-is, but maybe validateKeyOrCertOption() would be more accurate?

I like that better. I've updated with a commit now. Thanks

@nodejs-github-bot

This comment has been minimized.

@danbev danbev added the author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. label Jun 12, 2019
@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Jun 13, 2019

@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Jun 13, 2019

Landed in 173bee2

@Trott Trott closed this Jun 13, 2019
Trott pushed a commit to Trott/io.js that referenced this pull request Jun 13, 2019
This commit renames validateKeyCert to validateKeyCertArg to avoid
confusing this with something that would validate the actual key or
certificate.

PR-URL: nodejs#28116
Reviewed-By: Anto Aravinth <anto.aravinth.cse@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Sam Roberts <vieuxtech@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
BridgeAR pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 17, 2019
This commit renames validateKeyCert to validateKeyCertArg to avoid
confusing this with something that would validate the actual key or
certificate.

PR-URL: #28116
Reviewed-By: Anto Aravinth <anto.aravinth.cse@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Sam Roberts <vieuxtech@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
@BridgeAR BridgeAR mentioned this pull request Jun 17, 2019
@danbev danbev deleted the validateKeyCertArg branch August 20, 2019 07:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. tls Issues and PRs related to the tls subsystem.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants