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.

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

Resolve redirections #101

Closed
keith opened this issue Apr 6, 2014 · 3 comments
Closed

Resolve redirections #101

keith opened this issue Apr 6, 2014 · 3 comments

Comments

@keith
Copy link
Member

keith commented Apr 6, 2014

Often when users rename there github accounts there is a linter failure when they add a new spec. It fails saying something like:

- ERROR | The source of the spec doesn't match with the recorded ones. Source: `https://github.com/supermarin/ObjectiveRecord.git`. Previous: `https://github.com/mneorr/Objective-Record.git`
Please contact the specs repo maintainers if thelibrary changed location.
-> The spec cannot be accepted.

from

It would be great if the linter could follow the redirections to see that the URL is actually the same in both cases.

@neonichu
Copy link
Member

neonichu commented Apr 6, 2014

I think this is a good idea.

Potential risk: someone sets up a redirect to the original when pushing the new spec and changes it afterwards, so it might be wise to just to this for GitHub URLs?

@keith
Copy link
Member Author

keith commented Apr 6, 2014

Yes. It might be a good idea to limit this to Github to Github changes since users don't have that kind of control over the redirections.

@fabiopelosin
Copy link
Member

I think that the current implementation (with @neonichu) is good enough... Pretty soon we will be moving to Trunk and the authentication should prevent the hijacking this check is designed to prevent.

Ashton-W pushed a commit to Ashton-W/Core that referenced this issue Nov 2, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants