-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
Reuse Util.decodeFromBase64 #9906
Conversation
Signed-off-by: MichaelMorris <michael.morris@est.tech>
/azp run regression |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the PR. The changes look good to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for working on this.
I see that there are few missing replacements in the following classes:
- KafkaUserModelTest
- ListenersST
I was also wondering if we should create overloaded methods to cover cases where it takes or return a byte array. Same for the encoding method. This would be a different PR though. Wdyt?
@fvaleri Let's take it step by step to avoid having huge and big PRs full of conflicts and taking a long time to handle. |
Sure, they could be multiple PRs. |
I deliberately excluded the occurrences in KafkaUserModelTest and ListenersST as, unlike the other cases, the charset used in the String constructor is not specified (i.e. the platform's default charset is used) Perhaps it is ok to use Or perhaps I should:
|
I think that in |
Signed-off-by: MichaelMorris <michael.morris@est.tech>
/azp run regression |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM. Thanks.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM. Thanks for the PR!
Thanks for taking the time to review, I can also look at creating issues/PRs for the comment above by @fvaleri on also having methods for byte[], taking it one piece at a time |
Sure, feel free to look into it if you want. |
Type of change
Refactoring
Description
Refactor to make use of Util.decodeFromBase64 to reduce code duplication.
Closes #9745
Checklist
Please go through this checklist and make sure all applicable tasks have been done