guile-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v2] Add resolve-relative-reference in (web uri), as in RFC 39


From: Maxime Devos
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Add resolve-relative-reference in (web uri), as in RFC 3986 5.2.
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2023 20:49:45 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0



Op 02-10-2023 om 18:32 schreef Vivien Kraus:
Hi!

Are there other things to fix?

You forgot to include the warning of potential security issues in the documentation -- I don't mean that Guile should fix the issues (it can't), but rather that its documentation should inform the user that there exists a potential issue to fix.
+(define (merge-paths base-has-authority? base dependent)
+  "Return @samp{@var{base}/@var{dependent}}, with the subtelties of
absolute

subtle spelling error: subtleties -> subtleties

Also, if the result of changing the variable name is deviating from the RFC, then I'm not sure whether it is better. (I was thinking of relative -> maybe-relative myself, which sticks close to the RFC.) Rather bikesheddy, though.

diff --git a/test-suite/tests/web-uri.test b/test-suite/tests/web-
uri.test
index 95fd82f16..c453bf60f 100644
--- a/test-suite/tests/web-uri.test
+++ b/test-suite/tests/web-uri.test
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
  (define-module (test-web-uri)
    #:use-module (web uri)
    #:use-module (ice-9 regex)
+  #:use-module (ice-9 string-fun)
    #:use-module (test-suite lib))


Copyright lines need update 2020->2023, or a new update line if there is no assignment to FSF. (If you want to assign to FSF, the process to do this is started by the maintainer(s) -- I'm not a Guile maintainer.)

Also: new entry in AUTHORS (TODO: HACKING implies this is only if you assigned copyright to FSF, and only for new files, but, err, nope, copyright != author and likewise initial author != all authors) (*).

Also, according to HACKING, you should be self-congratulatory, i.e., add yourself to THANKS.

Other than that, I have no remarks.

Best regards,
Maxime Devos

(*) It says (paraphrases) ‘see maintain.texi for what should go in there’, but then the name of the file is extremely misleading, because authors != authors that a list is needed of according to maintain.texi.

Attachment: OpenPGP_0x49E3EE22191725EE.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]