Core: Added endpoint validation #7
Conversation
Seluj78
requested review from
BenjaminDDatascientest,
Cpavrai,
GilmarPro,
Kaleb0x and
Oussama-derouiche96
|
Warning Rate Limit Exceeded@Seluj78 has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 19 minutes and 45 seconds before requesting another review. How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. WalkthroughThis update introduces enhancements to the ShellHub library, focusing on URL handling and SSL usage. The Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #7 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 80.09% 81.73% +1.64%
==========================================
Files 4 4
Lines 211 230 +19
Branches 23 26 +3
==========================================
+ Hits 169 188 +19
Misses 34 34
Partials 8 8 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Seluj78
force-pushed
the
feature/endpoint-validation
branch
from
e671b7d to
aca9773
Compare
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 0
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (5)
- shellhub/init.py (1 hunks)
- shellhub/models/base.py (4 hunks)
- tests/conftest.py (1 hunks)
- tests/test_base.py (2 hunks)
- tests/utils.py (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- shellhub/init.py
- tests/utils.py
Additional comments: 14
tests/conftest.py (1)
- 19-19: Change from
endpointtoendpoint_or_urlaligns with PR objectives.tests/test_base.py (6)
- 15-15: Parameter name change to
endpoint_or_urlis consistent with PR objectives.- 21-21: Parameter name change to
endpoint_or_urlis consistent with PR objectives.- 31-31: Parameter name change to
endpoint_or_urlis consistent with PR objectives.- 35-35: Update to
reprmethod reflects the internal changes to theShellHubclass.- 39-39: Update to
strmethod reflects the internal changes to theShellHubclass.- 42-55: New tests for URL formatting and validation are correctly implemented and necessary for ensuring the new functionality works as expected.
shellhub/models/base.py (7)
- 22-24: Introduction of
_urlattribute and_use_sslflag aligns with PR objectives.- 26-31: Updates to
__init__method to acceptendpoint_or_urlanduse_sslparameters are correctly implemented.- 35-49: Implementation of
_format_and_validate_urlmethod is correct and necessary for URL formatting and validation.- 51-63: Implementation of
_is_valid_urlmethod is correct and efficiently checks URL format.- 66-66: Update to
__repr__method reflects the internal changes to theShellHubclass.- 69-69: Update to
__str__method reflects the internal changes to theShellHubclass.- 105-111: > 📝 NOTE
This review was outside the diff hunks and was mapped to the diff hunk with the greatest overlap. Original lines [108-118]
Updates to
make_requestfunction to use_urlattribute for constructing URLs are correctly implemented.
Fixes #6
Summary by CodeRabbit