-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.4k
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
advancedtls: Rename custom verification function APIs #7140
Merged
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
13 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
5c7819f
rename
gtcooke94 79b35eb
replace usage of CustomVerificationFunc
gtcooke94 e1248b0
replace usages
gtcooke94 0d6185d
rename the results struct
gtcooke94 53323db
address PR comments - deprecation comment structure
gtcooke94 5920acc
Add more description to PostHandshakeVerificationFunc
gtcooke94 010d89e
rename VerifyPeer option to AdditionalPeerVerification
gtcooke94 718e858
clean up PostHandshakeVerificationFunc documentation
gtcooke94 6bcc5f8
wording
gtcooke94 e6f065e
merge master
gtcooke94 84aa942
missed saving a file
gtcooke94 52dbf58
VType -> VerificationType after merge
gtcooke94 bb4d7b2
reverse precendence of deprecated option
gtcooke94 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
merge master
- Loading branch information
commit e6f065ee85f061772763bc85540c57fca60c166c
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
You are viewing a condensed version of this merge commit. You can view the full changes here.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
if o.AdditionalPeerVerification != nil { return <err> }
?Or ignore the old deprecated field
VerifyPeer
instead by reversing it:There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's not required, so the error return I think doesn't make the most sense.
The reverse works too, I guess it just matters for the precedence - I was going with "if the old field is set they probably haven't migrated", but the bottom is good too as a "if the new field isn't set take whatever is in the old field"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The error would be "you set two fields that mean the same thing, one of which is deprecated: what were you thinking?" 😆