Skip to content

feat(FileGetContents): remove file_exists check #270

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.

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

Conversation

bighappyface
Copy link
Collaborator

This PR removes the file_exists check in JsonSchema\Uri\Retrievers\FileGetContents per #262

@bighappyface
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@Maks3w @mirfilip this is a quick PR to remove the file_exists check and showcases how we had at least some test coverage despite the tests not being considered that great...

Frankly I didn't like the set_error_handler approach but with situations like this it looks more and more like reverting is the best option.

@Maks3w
Copy link
Contributor

Maks3w commented May 23, 2016

I understand you don't like and for my use case this PR is fine. However don't throw an exception where previously did still to be considered a BC Break.

Just revert the change and discuss why the error handler is not fine for you. The only issue I know is for nested error handlers.

As far as I read in other issues the retriever subcomponent doesn't like to anyone and a refactor is on the roadmap. Just restore previous code and focus in the refactor instead patch the code you don't like.

@bighappyface
Copy link
Collaborator Author

How about we just delete the 2.0.3 tag and leave the current code in dev-master? Wouldn't that solve your issue provided you don't have 2.0.3 set in your composer.lock file?

I would prefer to not revert code people took time to contribute and that made it through the review process.

@Maks3w
Copy link
Contributor

Maks3w commented May 23, 2016

Three Gold rule: Don't rewrite history, don't remove tags, don't introduce bc breaks.

IIRC the only good the original PR had was some code style and remove the unused context var. Whatever if the PR is wrong, is wrong, there is no much to discuss.

Do whatever you think its best. By the next time suspect from any change, kill the "Tests would be nice" tag and reject any PR does not follow the contribution guidelines.

@bighappyface
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@Maks3w there aren't any contribution guidelines. With such strong opinions you should consider contributing them and/or a fix for this as well. You are the only one complaining after all.

@bighappyface bighappyface deleted the no-file-exists-in-filegetcontents branch May 23, 2016 21:51
@Maks3w
Copy link
Contributor

Maks3w commented May 23, 2016

I'm contributing right now guiding you to become a better reviewer.

@bighappyface
Copy link
Collaborator Author

sure...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants