8000 Rename `clientDataJson` to `clientDataJSON` by joegoldman2 · Pull Request #450 · passwordless-lib/fido2-net-lib · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to content

Rename clientDataJson to clientDataJSON #450

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 10, 2023
Merged

Rename clientDataJson to clientDataJSON #450

merged 3 commits into from
Nov 10, 2023

Conversation

joegoldman2
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes #338.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link
codecov-commenter commented Oct 23, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (934abe4) 77.52% compared to head (da68730) 77.52%.

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #450   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   77.52%   77.52%           
=======================================
  Files          98       98           
  Lines        2714     2714           
  Branches      445      445           
=======================================
  Hits         2104     2104           
  Misses        491      491           
  Partials      119      119

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@aseigler aseigler self-requested a review October 23, 2023 14:18
@aseigler
Copy link
Collaborator

This is one of those things that has been inconsistent from day one. Should we take the call to rename all instances of clientDataJson to clientDataJSON and not just these two?

@joegoldman2
Copy link
Contributor Author

This is one of those things that 8000 has been inconsistent from day one. Should we take the call to rename all instances of clientDataJson to clientDataJSON and not just these two?

I was not sure if we want to use clientDataJSON with uppercase also in the c#. If you are ok with this, I can rename the property also in the c# contract.

@aseigler aseigler requested a review from abergs October 23, 2023 14:45
@aseigler
Copy link
Collaborator

This is one of those things that has been inconsistent from day one. Should we take the call to rename all instances of clientDataJson to clientDataJSON and not just these two?

I was not sure if we want to use clientDataJSON with uppercase also in the c#. If you are ok with this, I can rename the property also in the c# contract.

@abergs , @iamcarbon , opinions?

@iamcarbon
Copy link
Contributor

My personal preference would be to use clientDataJSON during JSON serialization, and rename all the C# properties to "ClientDataJson" to remain consistent with .NET conventions.

@abergs
Copy link
Collaborator
abergs commented Nov 2, 2023

For serialization/deserialization it should definitely be named clientDataJSON. That is what is used in the spec.

I would have tried to make the point on keeping JSON in .NET to make it less error-prone, but we rely on [JsonPropertyName] for many other fields, so that point is mute.

Go ahead and rename it to Json in .net @joegoldman2.

abergs
abergs requested changes Nov 2, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator
@abergs abergs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As discussed

abergs
abergs approved these changes Nov 10, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator
@abergs abergs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, looks good!

@abergs abergs merged commit 4774980 into passwordless-lib:master Nov 10, 2023
@joegoldman2 joegoldman2 deleted the fix/338 branch November 10, 2023 16:40
@zacknewman zacknewman mentioned this pull request Jan 18, 2024
Closed
1 task
@dependabot dependabot bot mentioned this pull request Aug 29, 2025
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@abergs abergs abergs approved these changes

@aseigler aseigler Awaiting requested review from aseigler

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

AuthenticatorAttestationRawResponse attestationResponse getting null.

5 participants

@joegoldman2 @codecov-commenter @aseigler @iamcarbon @abergs
0