Chromium Code Reviews
|
|
Chromium Code Reviews
Issue
2036493005:
Treat % as a non-canoncial character (Closed)
|
Created:
4 years, 6 months ago by Tom Sepez Modified:
4 years, 6 months ago Reviewers:
Mike West CC:
blink-reviews, blink-reviews-html_chromium.org, chromium-reviews, dglazkov+blink, kinuko+watch Base URL:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git@master Target Ref:
refs/pending/heads/master Project:
chromium Visibility:
Public. |
DescriptionTreat % as a non-canoncial character
BUG=613689
Committed: https://crrev.com/ed036799ce1e2973f98104e57566e2b8fe774c72
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#397732}
Patch Set 1 #
Messages
Total messages: 16 (7 generated)
Description was changed from ========== Treat % as a non-canoncial character BUG=613689 ========== to ========== Treat % as a non-canoncial character BUG=613689 ==========
tsepez@chromium.org changed reviewers: + mkwst@chromium.org
Mike, for review. I didn't add a test as I don't think I can make our test server do what's described in the bug. I'm more concerned about not breaking existing tests or introducing false positives.
The CQ bit was checked by mkwst@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run
Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/2036493005/1 View timeline at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/2036493005/1
On 2016/06/02 at 22:49:16, tsepez wrote: > Mike, for review. I didn't add a test as I don't think I can make our test server do what's described in the bug. I'm more concerned about not breaking existing tests or introducing false positives. I guess we can try it. I'm a little worried about doing so just because of the URL escaping rules, but if the bots are happy, it's worth trying out.
The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org
Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.
Bots look fine. LGTM.
On 2016/06/03 05:19:30, Mike West (OOO until 30th) wrote: > On 2016/06/02 at 22:49:16, tsepez wrote: > > Mike, for review. I didn't add a test as I don't think I can make our test > server do what's described in the bug. I'm more concerned about not breaking > existing tests or introducing false positives. > > I guess we can try it. I'm a little worried about doing so just because of the > URL escaping rules, but if the bots are happy, it's worth trying out. My belief is that this is ok because canoncialization occurs after we've fully reduced the legit %-sequences. Were it the other way around, we'd have issues.
The CQ bit was checked by tsepez@chromium.org
CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/2036493005/1
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Description was changed from ========== Treat % as a non-canoncial character BUG=613689 ========== to ========== Treat % as a non-canoncial character BUG=613689 ==========
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Committed patchset #1 (id:1)
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Description was changed from ========== Treat % as a non-canoncial character BUG=613689 ========== to ========== Treat % as a non-canoncial character BUG=613689 Committed: https://crrev.com/ed036799ce1e2973f98104e57566e2b8fe774c72 Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#397732} ==========
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Patchset 1 (id:??) landed as https://crrev.com/ed036799ce1e2973f98104e57566e2b8fe774c72 Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#397732} |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
