Make isFQDN more strict
#1474
Merged
Make isFQDN more strict
#1474
Conversation
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
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1474 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 99.92% 99.92%
=======================================
Files 96 96
Lines 1276 1278 +2
=======================================
+ Hits 1275 1277 +2
Misses 1 1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
No worries, sorry about that :) |
|
@CristhianMotoche -- thanks for sharing the reference details, will take a look and see if this addresses the problem fully. It's looking good so far though. |
This was referenced Mar 12, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I removed my fork some time ago 🤦 and I couldn't rebase my changes in PR #1180 , so I'm opening a new one. I'm sorry for the inconvenience 😞
Hello!
I reviewed the issue described in #704 and I applied the solution suggested there. I think making
isFQDNmore strict is good solution. Nevertheless, there are some discussions about it. I'd like to know your thoughts.Please, let me know if this PR solves #704 🙂
Checklist