Skip to content

Conversation

@drews256
Copy link
Contributor

@drews256 drews256 commented Nov 19, 2019

Description

This work starts the effort of removing connected_port.

Referencing this issue:
#1996

I have moved the code around a bit to get all connected_ports, the tests seem
to pass in the appropriate areas.

I want to verify this path before attempting to remove all UniquePort calls in
the tests.

@nateberkopec Also, I wanna talk about removing UniquePort, as it seems like it is being used for some CLI specs and the control-url. Is that approriate? Do we expect to be able to pass 0 in as the port for the control and be able to get it's connected port?

Your checklist for this pull request

  • I have reviewed the guidelines for contributing to this repository.
  • I have added an entry to History.md if this PR fixes a bug or adds a feature. If it doesn't need an entry to HISTORY.md, I have added [changelog skip] to all commit messages.
  • I have added appropriate tests if this PR fixes a bug or adds a feature.
  • My pull request is 100 lines added/removed or less so that it can be easily reviewed.
  • If this PR doesn't need tests (docs change), I added [ci skip] to the title of the PR.
  • If this closes any issues, I have added "Closes #issue" to the PR description or my commit messages.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • All new and existing tests passed, including Rubocop.

This work starts the effort of removing connected_port from the specs.

I have moved the code around a bit to get all connected_ports, the tests seem
to pass in the appropriate areas.

I want to verify this path before attempting to remove all UniquePort calls in
the tests.
@drews256 drews256 force-pushed the removes-connected-port branch from a2cdc0b to c4f6ac0 Compare November 19, 2019 18:51
@nateberkopec
Copy link
Member

Do we expect to be able to pass 0 in as the port for the control and be able to get it's connected port?

Control servers should be able to "bind" to port 0, just like app servers, yes.

@nateberkopec nateberkopec added the waiting-for-review Waiting on review from anyone label Feb 21, 2020
@nateberkopec nateberkopec linked an issue Feb 27, 2020 that may be closed by this pull request
2 tasks
end

attr_reader :connected_port
attr_reader :connected_ports
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not necessary as you define the method on the next line

@nateberkopec nateberkopec merged commit d91c112 into puma:master Feb 27, 2020
nateberkopec added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 27, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

maintenance waiting-for-review Waiting on review from anyone

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Remove Puma::Server#connected_port

2 participants