backintime
backintime copied to clipboard
Replace isipv6 method with builtin package
Closes #1686
- Removed
isIPv6Address()
function and related tests - Using
ipaddress
package directly in theescapeIPv6Address
function
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
Hey Christian, I am unable to see the review comments. I will get started on the test cases.
Dear Vaibhav,
On 2024-04-15 09:19 Vaibhav Raj @.***> wrote:
Hey Christian, I am unable to see the review comments. I will get started on the test cases.
I wonder how this could be. Do you read via email or do you visit github.com? When you visit github.com and visit your on PR you will see something like this (see attached screenshot). I added two circles with numbers to the picture to point you to the comments.
Can't you see this on the real github.com website?
Kind Christian
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?
But you also should see this review comments in the "Files changed" section when scrolling down.
Dear Vaibhav, can I somehow be of assistance? Kind, Christian
Dear Vaibhav, can you please give us some feedback about your plans and your next steps. Best, Christian
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
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
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
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").
Thanks Christian