-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
feat : Added support for proxy definitions #2923
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #2923 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 90.96% 90.76% -0.21%
===========================================
Files 21 21
Lines 1151 1169 +18
Branches 349 356 +7
===========================================
+ Hits 1047 1061 +14
- Misses 104 108 +4
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks great. I have one suggestion.
We should use this opportunity to see how we can load these from a general config concept. Now, that may become slightly out of scope for this PR, hence to keep this sane and forward compatible, let's put the config's definition to be an array within an object.
{
"proxies": [...]
}
PS: Meeting the test coverage (and changelog.yaml) will also be super cool and avoid someone else from needing to deep dive the PR post merge.
hi @shamasis , i have added new commits also tried to adding some test cases as well |
This PR can close #1701 which was opened as a feature request by @shamasis .
Not sure about which proxy server should be used for writing tests , should we need to create a proxy server using
http-proxy
or something else need to be done ?Any suggestions/changes in this PR which leads to closing the above issue are welcome.