advancedTLS: Combine ClientOptions and ServerOptions to just Options
#7202
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
dfawley
approved these changes
May 6, 2024
security/advancedtls/advancedtls.go
Outdated
| // Deprecated: use Options instead. | ||
| type ServerOptions = Options | ||
|
|
||
| // Options contains the fields a user can configure when settings up TLS clients |
security/advancedtls/advancedtls.go
Outdated
| // mutual authentication is required(RequireClientCert is true). | ||
| RootOptions RootCertificateOptions | ||
| // If the server want the client to send certificates. | ||
| // If the server want the client to send certificates. This value is only |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
want -> wants. Or "requires" probably is more precise.
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
ClientOptionsandServerOptionswere basically identical minus a few fields. Duplicating so much code and documentation is messy. Given both have a single field each that are not relevant to the other, I think that we can just combine them and document that.RELEASE NOTES: none