fix(ses): lockdown options should be kebob-case #2739
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
erights
force-pushed
the
markm-lockdown-options-kebob-case
branch
from
7714ec9 to
3545bfd
Compare
21 tasks
mhofman
approved these changes
Mar 12, 2025
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Closes: #XXXX
Refs: #961 #2690 #2723
Description
#961 deviated from our general convention that lockdown option values be kebob-case, instead adding
evalTaming:option valuessafeEval,unsafeEval,noEval. (I approved #961 at the time, apparently without noticing this discrepancy.) This PR fixes those to besafe-eval,unsafe-eval, andno-eval. But to avoid breaking any old usage, this PR ensure the only names continue to work for now, but always commented in the code as "deprecated".This PR does only that. Other changes to the relevant lockdown option or relevant lockdown options machinery are left to #2723 or #2690 respectively. I request that this PR go first, with those others adjusting to this one.
Security Considerations
none
Scaling Considerations
non
Documentation Considerations
This PR simply changes the documentation to use the new names without ever mentioning the deprecated old names. That seems like an appropriate simplification for the docs.
Testing Considerations
With a bit of duplication and renaming, we now test the new names and the old deprecated names.
Compatibility Considerations
To avoid breaking any old usage, this PR ensure the only names continue to work for now, but always commented in the code as "deprecated". It would be very nice to eventually be able to retire the deprecated names, but I find it hard to imagine how we'd test that it is safe to do so.
Upgrade Considerations
Nothing BREAKING, since the old deprecated names continue to work.
NEWS.mdfor user-facing changes.