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

Tweak error codes according to the conformance suite #1063

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Apr 22, 2024

Conversation

srikrsna-buf
Copy link
Member

@srikrsna-buf srikrsna-buf commented Apr 12, 2024

Tweak error codes according to the conformance suite. Users should not notice any difference as most of the tweaks are related to errors caused due to mis-implementation of the protocol.

Also update conformance runner to v1.0.2. This lets us shed node-forge and asn1js which we relied to generate a TLS cert.

Copy link
Member

@smaye81 smaye81 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just a thought, but is it worth splitting up the actual changes to the Connect library into their own PR(s) just to able to reason about the fixes a bit better?

@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ import { TestService } from "../gen/connectrpc/conformance/v1/test_connect.js";
import { describeTransports } from "../helpers/conformanceserver.js";
import { Empty } from "@bufbuild/protobuf";

describe("unimplemented_server_streaming_method", function () {
xdescribe("unimplemented_server_streaming_method", function () {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this meant to be skipped (along with the callback client one above?)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, this fails for both

packages/connect-web/src/connect-transport.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
packages/connect/src/promise-client.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@srikrsna-buf
Copy link
Member Author

Just a thought, but is it worth splitting up the actual changes to the Connect library into their own PR(s) just to able to reason about the fixes a bit better?

Then we'd end up not having tests for that, or we can update the conformance version first by adding a bunch of know failing, and then add the fixes removing the know failing cases.

It didn't seem worth it because the update is just a version bump and deleting some files, and all the fixes are status code related.

@smaye81
Copy link
Member

smaye81 commented Apr 19, 2024

Seems fine to me, but let's wait to see what @timostamm thinks.

Copy link
Member

@timostamm timostamm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we cut a release, this PR shows up in the changelog, and the title should tell users what we are changing.

The PR title doesn't give any indication that we're changing error codes, and it's not clear what exactly changes from looking at the diff.

We need better communication. For reference, see connectrpc/connect-go#706.

I suggest to change the PR title to be about the change to the code mappings, and only mention the conformance update in the description. You can link to the connectrpc.com PR, same as the connect-go change did. If there are other changes beyond the status code changes in this PR, please list them as well.

Comment on lines -26 to -27
"node-forge": "^1.3.1",
"asn1js": "^3.0.5",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🎉

@srikrsna-buf srikrsna-buf changed the title Upgrade conformance to v1.0.2 Tweak error codes according to the conformance suite Apr 22, 2024
@srikrsna-buf srikrsna-buf merged commit b086085 into main Apr 22, 2024
7 checks passed
@srikrsna-buf srikrsna-buf deleted the sk/conformance/rc3 branch April 22, 2024 11:31
@timostamm timostamm mentioned this pull request Sep 11, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants