cli_protocol: clarify FILE_OR_DIGEST #163
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: William Woodruff <william@trailofbits.com>
loosebazooka
approved these changes
Oct 2, 2024
|
what's the precedence? filename or hash first? Nevermind it looks like filename is checked first |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
@phillmv pointed out that the current conformance definition is a little ambiguous, and can be tripped up on clients like
gh(which emitssha256:hash.jsonlfiles by default). This clarifies it to say that anything that isn't exactly a hash should be intepreted as a filepath.