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

Provide native Java 11 HTTP client versions of FormValidation#URLCheck methods #7508

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 12, 2022

Conversation

basil
Copy link
Member

@basil basil commented Dec 10, 2022

Building on #7398, provide native Java 11 HTTP client versions of FormValidation#URLCheck methods, deprecating the old HttpURLConnection methods in favor of these and adding test coverage for the new functionality (the old functionality had no test coverage).

Testing done

Ran mvn clean verify -Dtest=hudson.util.FormValidationTest locally. As a bonus, I converted hudson.plugins.git.browser.AssemblaWebDoCheckURLTest#testInitialChecksOnRepoUrl to this new API and verified that doing so chased away the weird Java 19 problem I was seeing in jenkinsci/bom#1637 (comment).

Proposed changelog entries

Provide native Java 11 HTTP client versions of FormValidation#URLCheck methods

Proposed upgrade guidelines

N/A

Submitter checklist

  • The Jira issue, if it exists, is well-described.
  • The changelog entries and upgrade guidelines are appropriate for the audience affected by the change (users or developers, depending on the change) and are in the imperative mood (see examples).
    • Fill in the Proposed upgrade guidelines section only if there are breaking changes or changes that may require extra steps from users during upgrade.
  • There is automated testing or an explanation as to why this change has no tests.
  • New public classes, fields, and methods are annotated with @Restricted or have @since TODO Javadocs, as appropriate.
  • New deprecations are annotated with @Deprecated(since = "TODO") or @Deprecated(forRemoval = true, since = "TODO"), if applicable.
  • New or substantially changed JavaScript is not defined inline and does not call eval to ease future introduction of Content Security Policy (CSP) directives (see documentation).
  • For dependency updates, there are links to external changelogs and, if possible, full differentials.
  • For new APIs and extension points, there is a link to at least one consumer.

Desired reviewers

@mention

Maintainer checklist

Before the changes are marked as ready-for-merge:

  • There are at least two (2) approvals for the pull request and no outstanding requests for change.
  • Conversations in the pull request are over, or it is explicit that a reviewer is not blocking the change.
  • Changelog entries in the pull request title and/or Proposed changelog entries are accurate, human-readable, and in the imperative mood.
  • Proper changelog labels are set so that the changelog can be generated automatically.
  • If the change needs additional upgrade steps from users, the upgrade-guide-needed label is set and there is a Proposed upgrade guidelines section in the pull request title (see example).
  • If it would make sense to backport the change to LTS, a Jira issue must exist, be a Bug or Improvement, and be labeled as lts-candidate to be considered (see query).

@basil basil added the developer Changes which impact plugin developers label Dec 10, 2022
@@ -367,7 +367,7 @@ public static InputStream getInputStream(URL url) throws IOException {
* @since TODO
*/
public static HttpClient newHttpClient() {
return newHttpClientBuilder().build();
return newHttpClientBuilder().followRedirects(HttpClient.Redirect.NORMAL).build();
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Unrelated change while I was here: while testing with URLs like https://app.assembla.com/login that have a redirect, I noticed that the old HttpURLConnection API automatically followed redirects but the new Java 11 HTTP client API was not. To ease migration I figured it would be best to follow redirects by default. I could not think of a case where you would not want to follow them, and it matches the behavior of the old API. Of course anyone who wants to opt out can always do so by creating a custom builder without this option (something that was not possible with the old API).

@@ -499,9 +552,9 @@ protected FormValidation handleIOException(String url, IOException e) throws IOE
// any invalid URL comes here
if (e.getMessage().equals(url))
// Sun JRE (and probably others too) often return just the URL in the error.
return error("Unable to connect " + url);
return error("Unable to connect " + url, e);
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Minor unrelated change while I was here: append the stack trace for debuggability. We love stack traces.

@basil basil mentioned this pull request Dec 10, 2022
@basil
Copy link
Member Author

basil commented Dec 11, 2022

This PR is now ready for merge. We will merge it after approximately 24 hours if there is no negative feedback. Please see the merge process documentation for more information about the merge process. Thanks!

@basil basil added the ready-for-merge The PR is ready to go, and it will be merged soon if there is no negative feedback label Dec 11, 2022
@basil basil merged commit 540052a into jenkinsci:master Dec 12, 2022
@basil basil deleted the URLCheck branch December 12, 2022 16:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
developer Changes which impact plugin developers ready-for-merge The PR is ready to go, and it will be merged soon if there is no negative feedback
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants