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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

WiP: do not merge! 0.10 -> master merge whenever it is ready to be named a 'stable'-ish one #1410

Closed
wants to merge 421 commits into from
Closed

WiP: do not merge! 0.10 -> master merge whenever it is ready to be named a 'stable'-ish one #1410

wants to merge 421 commits into from

Conversation

yarikoptic
Copy link
Member

This PR is staging to make sure that we can progress from current state of master into the world of 0.10. To be "merged" after a few of 0.10.x experimental releases

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented May 10, 2016 •
edited

Codecov Report

Merging #1410 into master will increase coverage by 4.77%.
The diff coverage is 93.65%.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master   #1410      +/-   ##
=========================================
+ Coverage   89.73%   94.5%   +4.77%     
=========================================
  Files          69      77       +8     
  Lines        7432   11828    +4396     
  Branches     1020    1827     +807     
=========================================
+ Hits         6669   11178    +4509     
+ Misses        597     375     -222     
- Partials      166     275     +109
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
fail2ban/tests/action_d/test_badips.py 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
fail2ban/tests/samplestestcase.py 98.54% <ø> (+4.72%) ⬆️
fail2ban/tests/tickettestcase.py 100% <ø> (ø)
fail2ban/tests/filtertestcase.py 99.19% <ø> (-0.13%) ⬇️
fail2ban/version.py 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
config/action.d/badips.py 85.71% <ø> (+14.67%) ⬆️
fail2ban/tests/misctestcase.py 96.15% <ø> (-0.35%) ⬇️
fail2ban/tests/servertestcase.py 92.73% <ø> (+2.19%) ⬆️
fail2ban/tests/utils.py 95.25% <ø> (+7.07%) ⬆️
fail2ban/tests/sockettestcase.py 97.33% <ø> (-2.67%) ⬇️
... and 89 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update d3b644a...1e67878. Read the comment docs.

@yarikoptic yarikoptic mentioned this pull request May 10, 2016
Closed
@sebres
Copy link
Contributor

sebres commented May 11, 2016

Merged branch sebres:ipv6-support-0.10 into 0.10, some differences to #1374:

  • IPv6 will be really found in filter, because new <HOST> expression respects IPV6 also (and differentiate it from IPv4:port)
  • pseudo-conditional sections for IPv6 support in config files, like [Init?family=inet6];
  • interpolation resp. substitution of tags in action up to 1000 times faster (because will be cached now);
  • caching of IPAddr (and some DNSUtils primitives);
  • extremely fast (and imho more stable as master, at least with regard to memory leaks, and hanger at the start by seek over log files)
  • coverage increased (+1.8%) to 94.3%

@sebres sebres added this to the 0.10.0 milestone May 11, 2016
@yarikoptic
Copy link
Member Author

Merged branch sebres:ipv6-support-0.10 into 0.10... oh -- I thought we would still go traditional way of PRs to introduce changes to 0.10... now need to browse differences locally I guess or come up with adhoc view on github to see only ipv6 related changes in 0.10

@sebres
Copy link
Contributor

sebres commented May 11, 2016

@fail2ban/contributors, @fail2ban/developers if someone want to contribute for IPv6 support:

@yarikoptic
Copy link
Member Author

not to say that some of my changes have lost my 'authorship' and some were abandoned (e.g. 42144b0)

@yarikoptic
Copy link
Member Author

actually sorry @sebres -- I think that those changes 42144b0 are in, just again -- was difficult to see from local diff and didn't spot any commit with me as an author.
otherwise -- great job! ;)

yarikoptic
yarikoptic reviewed May 11, 2016
View reviewed changes
ChangeLog Outdated
both classes moved to new module `ipdns`
* pseudo-conditional section introduced, for conditional substitution resp.
evaluation of parameters for different family qualified hosts,
syntax `[Section?family=inet6]` (currently use for IPv6-support only).
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

there were more in #1346, such as "time with units" definitions, waitfor (IIRC) within tests to speed them up, ...

@sebres
Copy link
Contributor

sebres commented May 11, 2016

I thought we would still go traditional way of PRs to introduce changes to 0.10

I thought, 0.10 should have IPv6 support :) BTW: it's still merge from ipv6-support-0.10, so it can be good keep apart.

Another things would be surely a PRs...

authorship

Indeed I've lost it by switching and commited as my (real shame!). But the branches were too different :)) I'll try to fix my mistake, but will "sign" only remained code of you as yours.
Many things are really obsolete, for example I've from begin an implicit converting str <-> IPAddr, so many code pieces are not expected at all (including your decorator @iparg, etc.)

@yarikoptic
Copy link
Member Author

I thought, 0.10 should have IPv6 support :) -- sure! but again, better reviewed before merged
I'll try to fix my mistake -- nah, don't bother... just was whining since generally it is of some value ;) -- progress is more important than authorship though

@sebres
Copy link
Contributor

sebres commented May 11, 2016

So I'll also add all the enhancements and fixes in changelog from #1346 directly in 0.10 (without PR)

@sebres sebres self-assigned this May 11, 2016
@sebres
Copy link
Contributor

sebres commented May 11, 2016

@yarikoptic authorship restored (as I could find it ;)))

@yarikoptic
Copy link
Member Author

On Wed, 11 May 2016, Serg G. Brester wrote:

@yarikoptic authorship restored (as I could find it ;)))

thanks! I hope it wasn't much of a pain. but in general now let's avoid
rebasing or rewriting 0.10 branch.

@sebres sebres removed their assignment May 11, 2016
@sebres
Copy link
Contributor

sebres commented May 11, 2016

I'll try to implement the todo list from #1346 (I promised :)))

koeppea
koeppea reviewed May 11, 2016
View reviewed changes
MANIFEST Outdated
@@ -164,6 +164,7 @@ fail2ban/client/jailreader.py
fail2ban/client/jailsreader.py
fail2ban/exceptions.py
fail2ban/helpers.py
fail2ban/ipdns.py
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

wouldn't this be fail2ban/server/ipdns.py?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

right

@koeppea
Copy link
Contributor

koeppea commented May 11, 2016

@sebres What you've done, how you've integrated and "pythoned" it through the roof is unbelievable.
Great job.
👍
I've inserted some comments directly into the code and will continue testing now.
I think testing will take some days though.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.8%) to 96.74% when pulling da808fe on 0.10 into d3b644a on master.

7 similar comments
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.8%) to 96.74% when pulling da808fe on 0.10 into d3b644a on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.8%) to 96.74% when pulling da808fe on 0.10 into d3b644a on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.8%) to 96.74% when pulling da808fe on 0.10 into d3b644a on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.8%) to 96.74% when pulling da808fe on 0.10 into d3b644a on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.8%) to 96.74% when pulling da808fe on 0.10 into d3b644a on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.8%) to 96.74% when pulling da808fe on 0.10 into d3b644a on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.8%) to 96.74% when pulling da808fe on 0.10 into d3b644a on master.

@sebres
fixes a small blemish by output in beautifier;
93ec9e0 
command "unban" returns a count of tickets that were flushed
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.8%) to 96.751% when pulling 93ec9e0 on 0.10 into d3b644a on master.

2 similar comments
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 17, 2017 •
edited

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.8%) to 96.751% when pulling 93ec9e0 on 0.10 into d3b644a on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 17, 2017 •
edited

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.8%) to 96.751% when pulling 93ec9e0 on 0.10 into d3b644a on master.

@sebres
[interim commit] try to fix possible escape vulnerability in actions
e5c9f9e
@sebres
fixed grave vulnerability by wrong escape of tags by executing of she…
4f14737 
…ll actions
@sebres
bug fix in the config readers: mixing with the init section should af…
57e9c25 
…fect only own init options (from init section only bypass default section);

the situation details:
  value of "_daemon" from default section "default" (with init section) falsely overwrites it from definition section "test" -
  the resulting value of "_daemon" should be "test" in all 3 resulting failregex's (as specified in test.local),
  fixed and covered now;
additionally more complex cases covered also (all filter parameters in jail via "%(known/...)s", dynamical interpolation across all, etc);
@sebres
test coverage
32f3c1d
@sebres
amend to 5561423: fixed incorrect failure counting despite the `<F-NO…
f13fac5 
…FAIL>` marked regex;

extra: introduced new tag `<F-MLFFORGET>` as mark to forget current multi-line MLFID (e. g. connection closed);
Closes gh-1727
@sebres
don't remove MLFID from cache (can recognize multiple attempt within …
1971fd4 
…the same connection)
@sebres
SampleRegexsFactory extended with optional filter constraint, if test…
b6886f2 
…ing the same log-file with multiple filters (no possibility to match by the old sshd-filter 'zzz-sshd-obsolete-multiline')
@sebres
small amend that correct log trace output by forget MLFID (outputs th…
43d2cae 
…e reason why it was forgotten - close, disconnect, etc.)
@sebres
Merge pull request #1728 from sebres/_0.10/fix-gh-1719
bb9541b
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+3.7%) to 95.698% when pulling bb9541b on 0.10 into d3b644a on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+3.7%) to 95.698% when pulling 7a03c96 on 0.10 into d3b644a on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.2%) to 96.108% when pulling 1e67878 on 0.10 into d3b644a on master.

@yarikoptic
Copy link
Member Author

closed by @sebres request ;)

@yarikoptic yarikoptic closed this Mar 21, 2017
@sebres
Copy link
Contributor

sebres commented Mar 21, 2017

¡Gracias!
If I can manage to build the next release of 0.10th branch, I let know here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
enhancement ipv6 needs-testing WiP
Projects
None yet
Milestone
0.10.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet