ref(wsgi): Update _werkzeug vendor to newer version
Fixes GH-3516
Codecov Report
:x: Patch coverage is 44.44444% with 15 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
:white_check_mark: Project coverage is 83.41%. Comparing base (5a122b5) to head (ba2c350).
| Files with missing lines | Patch % | Lines |
|---|---|---|
| sentry_sdk/_werkzeug.py | 44.44% | 11 Missing and 4 partials :warning: |
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #4793 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 84.47% 83.41% -1.07%
==========================================
Files 158 158
Lines 16506 16512 +6
Branches 2865 2864 -1
==========================================
- Hits 13944 13773 -171
- Misses 1712 1889 +177
Partials 850 850
| Files with missing lines | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| sentry_sdk/_werkzeug.py | 54.54% <44.44%> (+6.39%) |
:arrow_up: |
Thanks for the PR @mgaligniana -- I think the HTTP_X_FORWARDED_HOST handling needs to be added manually on top of the vendored in code. As far as I can tell we also did that in the current version as the original upstream 1.0.1 version also doesn't contain it.
Ok, Seer 🎉 liked!
But codecov not, should I add new tests for the new vendor?
Edited: I think yes because Anton said:
Also make sure this code is tested to have a high test coverage. (maybe by vendoring in the related tests from Werkzeug?)
But do you think I should copy-paste the test from werkzeug to get_host for example?
But do you think I should copy-paste the test from werkzeug to get_host for example?
Tests would be great. I think the one you linked would be good, plus something custom for the HTTP_X_FORWARDED_HOST stuff.
So adding that now we have
There we go!
Hi @sentrivana, just following up on this! In case you need any changes from my side! Thank you!
Hey @mgaligniana, sorry for dropping the ball on this, I'll get to reviewing eventually -- no need for you to wait though, I can just apply any changes myself. Thanks for your work!
Perfect, no problem!! Thank you!!