Remove dependency on base64 gem #3559
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
Added in DataDog#3364. It's just a simple wrapper, so it's trivial to inline. Add a new module to keep keep descriptive method names
github-actions
bot
added
appsec
marcotc
approved these changes
Mar 28, 2024
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
2.0 Upgrade Guide notes
What does this PR do?
Remove the runtime dependency on the base64 gem.
Motivation:
#3364 added a dependency on the base64 gem to silence warnings on Ruby >= 3.4
The used portions of the base64 gem are just wrappers around the pack/unpack methods (see here). These can be added to a module to keep their descriptive names and allow the gem to drop a dependency.
I've done something quite similar for the newrelic agent here, and other gems did something like that as well:
base64gem from runtime dependency rubocop/rubocop#12313base64bblimke/webmock#1046Additional Notes:
I think I'm not supposed to touch the gemfiles/lockfiles? I believe I github action will take care of that.
How to test the change?
Current tests are fine.
For Datadog employees:
credentials of any kind, I've requested a review from
@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance.Unsure? Have a question? Request a review!