WINDUP-3837 Fix 'azure-logging-0000' rule and test accordingly #933
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
|
The codes changes simplify the rules considerably and tested successfully. Thank you. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WINDUP-3837
The issue was related with concurrent usage of
fileAppenderPatternandextensionparameters that when matching a value were excluding other possible matching values.Also the expected results (i.e.
9) was wrong because in the test files there are more matches.So I've collapsed the multiple
filecontentconditions into a single one collecting all the different patterns (consistently).I've also update the expected matches in the test to be
12basically matching each test file butlog4j-console.xmlfile which has no matches (andlogback-spring.xmlmatches twice).I've also fixed a link to remove a space and move to
https(instead ofhttp)No need to backport because the "original" PR (i.e. #931) has no backport