-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 491
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
update regex to comply with RFC-3986 #1644
update regex to comply with RFC-3986 #1644
Conversation
|
Welcome @jackstine! |
Hi @jackstine. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
Thanks for catching this @jackstine! Just want to make sure I'm understanding both changes correctly:
Does that line up with what you're thinking? Did I miss anything? /ok-to-test |
Hey @robscott that is exactly right. Also |
Makes sense, thanks @jackstine! Will defer to someone else to LGTM. /approve |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: jackstine, robscott The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
/lgtm |
Any chance we could add a unit test for the regexp change? |
@dprotaso that seems like a good idea. So far the only way we've tested CRD validation is by adding valid examples to |
update regex to comply with RFC-3986
Description
Adding
[%][0-9a-fA-F]{2}
as an option to find Hex values. Also adding@
as a value to find as well.The subset of single characters can be selected in addition to the set of all Hex values, hence the
(?:<pattern1>|<pattern2>)
What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
What this PR does / why we need it:
Complies with RFC-3986 "p-char" characters.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Updates this PR #1599
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:
It might, but not really.