Closed djc closed 6 months ago
I've rolled back the field rename, and added a commit that cleans up a clippy issue likely new in Rust 1.76.
@djc This and your other PR need a rebase/merge. Normally I can do that from right in here but the option isn't showing up. I'm guessing maybe because you haven't allowed commits from maintainers: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/working-with-forks/allowing-changes-to-a-pull-request-branch-created-from-a-fork
@djc This and your other PR need a rebase/merge. Normally I can do that from right in here but the option isn't showing up. I'm guessing maybe because you haven't allowed commits from maintainers: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/working-with-forks/allowing-changes-to-a-pull-request-branch-created-from-a-fork
Hmm, I'm not seeing this checkbox show up.
Is there any chance/method by which you can put me on an allowlist to allow CI to run without waiting for explicit approval? What with the timezone differences, these feedback cycles are pretty slow. :(
@djc This and your other PR need a rebase/merge. Normally I can do that from right in here but the option isn't showing up. I'm guessing maybe because you haven't allowed commits from maintainers: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/working-with-forks/allowing-changes-to-a-pull-request-branch-created-from-a-fork
Hmm, I'm not seeing this checkbox show up.
Is there any chance/method by which you can put me on an allowlist to allow CI to run without waiting for explicit approval? What with the timezone differences, these feedback cycles are pretty slow. :(
I've changed it to only requiring approval for new contributors.
I've changed it to only requiring approval for new contributors.
Thanks! Rebased this on top of current master, I guess that will do the job?
The remaining test failure looks unrelated to this change?
The remaining test failure looks unrelated to this change?
Yeah it flakes occasionally. I'll re-run it and merge it.
What was changed
Add a
_pem
suffix to bothClientTlsConfig
fields, and remove theclient_
prefix (which is redundant with theClientTlsConfig
type name) to try to balance the length increase.Why?
While trying to get a Rust SDK worker connected to Temporal Cloud, I got a
TonicTransportError(tonic::transport::Error(Transport, PrivateKeyParseError))
. This turned out to because I was passing DER-encoded private key and certificate toClientTlsConfig
instead of PEM. tonic'sIdentity::from_pem()
makes it obvious that they should be PEM, but that context isn't obvious when looking at the rustdoc fortemporal_client::ClientTlsConfig
(and in fact, because it uses aVec<u8>
type instead of aString
type, it suggests using DER over PEM).Checklist