better align parsing with spec #17
Merged
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Overview
I was looking at package-url/packageurl-python#123 and found a case where parsing the canonical PURL requires following almost exactly the parsing algorithm described in the spec.
We need to be doing more rsplits and we need to rsplit the version from the name before rsplitting the name from the namespace. Otherwise, if the version contains a slash we get the wrong result.
The format test was ensuring slashes in the version were percent encoded, which is not part of the spec, but was required to be able to parse the resulting PURL string when using the incorrect parsing algorithm. I moved it into our test json so it covers both directions and we test deserialization for both the properly escaped and improperly escaped cases (followup PR for better coverage).
Checklist
Issue
What issue(s) does this PR close. Use the
closes #<issueNum>here.