Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
@yegor256 take a look please, happy to clarify anything about this change. |
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
repo_id_by_name,repo_name_by_idanduser_name_by_idturned only a 404 and a 403 intoFbe::Error. GitHub also answers 451 for a repository under a DMCA takedown and 410 for some removed resources, and these came out as rawOctokit::UnavailableForLegalReasonsandOctokit::Deprecated, while the callers expectFbe::Error, as #1227 shows.Now the three lookups also rescue these two errors and raise the same "is not accessible"
Fbe::Error. I kept the list explicit instead of rescuing everyOctokit::ClientError, so a rate limit error still reaches the caller as it is.Six tests stub each lookup with a 451 and with a 410 and expect
Fbe::Error.Closes #1227