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

Replace isipv6 method with builtin package #1689

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
May 23, 2024

Conversation

jarbhav
Copy link
Contributor

@jarbhav jarbhav commented Apr 15, 2024

Closes #1686

  • Removed isIPv6Address() function and related tests
  • Using ipaddress package directly in the escapeIPv6Address function

@buhtz
Copy link
Member

buhtz commented Apr 15, 2024

Dear Vaibhav,
Thank you for your contribution. I appreciate it.

Looks nice. Good work. I added some review comments to the code.

Beside my comments it would be nice if you could improve tests. The behavior of the function escapeIPv6Address() has three outcomes: 1) escaped IP 2) not escaped IP 3) raised ValueError. This three outcomes could be covered in three different unit tests. The current test do cover only 1) and 2) in one function but it would improve test quality if each of the three outcomes are tested in separate test methods.

Let me know if I can be of assistance.

Best,
Christian

@buhtz buhtz self-assigned this Apr 15, 2024
@jarbhav
Copy link
Contributor Author

jarbhav commented Apr 15, 2024

Hey Christian, I am unable to see the review comments.
I will get started on the test cases.

@buhtz
Copy link
Member

buhtz commented Apr 15, 2024 via email

@jarbhav
Copy link
Contributor Author

jarbhav commented Apr 15, 2024

image

@buhtz
Copy link
Member

buhtz commented Apr 15, 2024

Your screenshot looks like the "Files changed" section. My apologize. I think the term I used (code comments) is not correct. Correct would be review comments. Have a look at this screencast. Does this help you?
Peek 2024-04-15 20-02

But you also should see this review comments in the "Files changed" section when scrolling down.
grafik

@buhtz buhtz added the Feedback needs user response, may be closed after timeout without a response label Apr 21, 2024
@buhtz
Copy link
Member

buhtz commented Apr 23, 2024

Dear Vaibhav,
can I somehow be of assistance?
Kind,
Christian

common/tools.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
common/tools.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@buhtz buhtz added PR: Modifications requested Maintenance team requested modifications and waiting for their implementation and removed Feedback needs user response, may be closed after timeout without a response labels May 2, 2024
@buhtz
Copy link
Member

buhtz commented May 11, 2024

Dear Vaibhav,
can you please give us some feedback about your plans and your next steps.
Best,
Christian

@jarbhav
Copy link
Contributor Author

jarbhav commented May 12, 2024

Hey Christian,
I apologize for the lack of response; I will try to get back to you with all the changes above in the coming 3 days.
Please let me know if this should be done sooner.
Vaibhav

@buhtz
Copy link
Member

buhtz commented May 12, 2024

Dear Vaibhav,
Thank you for the reply.

I will try to get back to you with all the changes above in the coming 3 days. Please let me know if this should be done sooner.

That is totally fine for me. Take your time. No need to hurry. I just need to know your schedule to "integrate" your PR into the rest of our workflow and tasks. Sometimes we have contributors throwing in a PR but not finalizing it.

Best,
Christian

@jarbhav
Copy link
Contributor Author

jarbhav commented May 13, 2024

Dear Christian,
I have made the suggested changes, also separated the test method into three different methods. Please let me know if any changes are required

Vaibhav

@buhtz
Copy link
Member

buhtz commented May 21, 2024

Dear Vaibhav,
please apologize my late reply. Your modifications looking good. I just did some refactoring and thing we are now ready to merge. I will merge in some days after a cool down period. Please see What happens after you opened a Pull Request (PR)? about how we handle this usually.

  • I refactored the unit tests a bit.
  • I rewinded my ValueError proposal. Other tests failed because they where using host names (e.g. "localhost").

@buhtz buhtz added PR: Merge after creative-break Merge after creative-break (min. 1 week) and removed PR: Modifications requested Maintenance team requested modifications and waiting for their implementation labels May 21, 2024
@jarbhav
Copy link
Contributor Author

jarbhav commented May 21, 2024

Thanks Christian

@buhtz buhtz merged commit e6f7f4f into bit-team:dev May 23, 2024
1 check passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
PR: Merge after creative-break Merge after creative-break (min. 1 week)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Replace an "isIPv6Address()" with python package "ipaddress"
2 participants