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

Make the port number optional in JupyterConnectionInfo() #2473

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 22, 2024
Merged

Make the port number optional in JupyterConnectionInfo() #2473

merged 3 commits into from
Apr 22, 2024

Conversation

luxuncang
Copy link
Contributor

Why are these changes needed?

The changes are needed to make the port number optional in the JupyterConnectionInfo() class when using a remote Docker server with a Jupyter notebook. Currently, the code expects a port number even when using an HTTPS connection with a hostname. This update allows passing HTTPS-enabled hostnames without the need for a port number.

Related issue number

Issue #2458

Checks

Please review the completed GitHub Pull请求变更文档 and make any necessary adjustments before opening the pull request.

@luxuncang
Copy link
Contributor Author

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree

@ekzhu ekzhu requested a review from jackgerrits April 22, 2024 15:40
@ekzhu ekzhu added this pull request to the merge queue Apr 22, 2024
Merged via the queue into microsoft:main with commit 4e13f22 Apr 22, 2024
32 of 45 checks passed
jayralencar pushed a commit to jayralencar/autogen that referenced this pull request May 28, 2024
@luxuncang
Make the port number optional in JupyterConnectionInfo() (microsoft#2473
2e8da29 
)

* fix: JupyterConnectionInfo port type

* fix: jupyter_client base_url

* fix: JupyterConnectionInfo
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jackgerrits jackgerrits jackgerrits approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
3 participants
@luxuncang @jackgerrits @ekzhu