Validation v3 #36
Validation v3 #36
Conversation
…n for RegistrationV2; using switch type to determine which registration type is meant to be validated
maurafortino
added
the
needs discussion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great work! This is coming along, I left a few suggestions.
I think we should reconsider reusing the validation code in order to reduce the volume of changes in the pr.
Also, we should consider following the same pattern for the RegistrationV2's validation code (i.e. moving the V2 validation code into their own funcs)
Great work, keep it up! 🍻
…c validate function to improve testing
| } | ||
| } | ||
| return nil | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I removed this function entirely since the code is the same for both v1 and v2
validationConfig.go
Outdated
| @@ -87,7 +78,7 @@ func buildURLChecker(config ValidatorConfig) (*urlegit.Checker, error) { | |||
| func BuildValidators(config ValidatorConfig) ([]Option, error) { | |||
| var opts []Option | |||
|
|
|||
| checker, err := buildURLChecker(config) | |||
| checker, err := BuildURLChecker(config) | |||
| if err != nil { | |||
| return nil, err | |||
| } | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This function will be updated in a future PR
| GetId() string | ||
| GetUntil() time.Time | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This has been added to ancla
is being added back into ancla
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## denopink/feat/webhooks #36 +/- ##
=========================================================
Coverage ? 91.61%
=========================================================
Files ? 3
Lines ? 298
Branches ? 0
=========================================================
Hits ? 273
Misses ? 25
Partials ? 0
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
What's Included:
**Need to discuss: