feat: add OpenFeature Remote Evaluation Protocol (OFREP) Provider #319
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
…e#305 (open-feature#309) Signed-off-by: christian.lutnik <christian.lutnik@dynatrace.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Poignant <thomas.poignant@gofeatureflag.org>
open-feature#288) Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Richardson <michael.richardson@octopus.com>
…-feature#318) Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
582555b to
81fa968
Compare
…feature#231) Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: André Silva <2493377+askpt@users.noreply.github.com>
…n-feature#321) Signed-off-by: André Silva <2493377+askpt@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Michael Beemer <beeme1mr@users.noreply.github.com>
…pen-feature#325) Signed-off-by: André Silva <2493377+askpt@users.noreply.github.com>
…ature#274) Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
…e#289) Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Michael Beemer <beeme1mr@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: André Silva <2493377+askpt@users.noreply.github.com>
…v0.5.21 (open-feature#291) Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
|
|
||
| [Fact] | ||
| public async Task EvaluateFlag_WithNestedEvaluationContext_ShouldSerializeCorrectly() | ||
| { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Similar to the other evaluation context tests, it would be good to check that the context is serialized as we expect it
test/OpenFeature.Providers.Ofrep.Test/Client/OfrepClientTest.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
|
||
| // Verify the unicode characters were properly URL encoded | ||
| var request = this._mockHandler.Requests[0]; | ||
| Assert.Contains("ofrep/v1/evaluate/flags/", request.RequestUri?.ToString()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We don't verify that the uri contains the unicode character in the flag key
|
|
||
| [Fact] | ||
| public async Task EvaluateFlag_WithSlowResponse_ShouldReturnSuccessfully() | ||
| { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure how this test diffs from the other normal happy path tests
Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
…ge`-attributes Signed-off-by: Weyert de Boer <weyert@innerfuse.biz>
Signed-off-by: Weyert de Boer <weyert@innerfuse.biz>
Signed-off-by: Weyert de Boer <weyert@innerfuse.biz>
Signed-off-by: Weyert de Boer <weyert@innerfuse.biz>
Signed-off-by: Weyert de Boer <weyert@innerfuse.biz>
390fb9f to
f3d3ba1
Compare
Signed-off-by: Weyert de Boer <weyert@innerfuse.biz>
- Fix test expectation for special characters (!@#) to match Uri.EscapeDataString behavior - Update test verification to check multiple URI properties for encoded content - Ensure proper URL encoding preservation in HttpRequestMessage construction Signed-off-by: Weyert de Boer <weyert@innerfuse.biz>
Signed-off-by: Weyert de Boer <weyert@innerfuse.biz>
e1badcd to
ed5cf97
Compare
toddbaert
reviewed
Jun 19, 2025
Comment on lines
140
to
147
| #if NET8_0_OR_GREATER | ||
| ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull(flagKey); | ||
| #else | ||
| if (flagKey == null) | ||
| { | ||
| throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(flagKey)); | ||
| } | ||
| #endif |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If this is just to make use of a language feature, I would say vote to remove the compiler directive and just use the common version. I think adding compiler directives like this takes away from readability so I recommend only doing it when we really have to.
If we "really have to" here for some reason I don't understand, that's OK.
toddbaert
reviewed
Jun 19, 2025
Comment on lines
53
to
66
| #if NET8_0_OR_GREATER | ||
| ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull(configuration); | ||
| ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull(handler); | ||
| #else | ||
| if (configuration == null) | ||
| { | ||
| throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(configuration)); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if (handler == null) | ||
| { | ||
| throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(handler)); | ||
| } | ||
| #endif |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same as https://github.com/open-feature/dotnet-sdk-contrib/pull/319/files#r2157403557, I would apply this all over if you aren't opposed.
Signed-off-by: Weyert de Boer <weyert@innerfuse.biz>
toddbaert
approved these changes
Jun 19, 2025
askpt
requested changes
Jun 19, 2025
.tool-versions
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you please remove this file from the repo? If you want, you can add this file to the .gitignore.
Signed-off-by: Weyert de Boer <weyert@innerfuse.biz>
Signed-off-by: Weyert de Boer <weyert@innerfuse.biz>
b88b60d to
8483ae4
Compare
|
@weyert Why is this PR closed? |
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.
This PR
The provider allows users to evaluate feature flags through the OFREP API, making it adaptable to various feature flag management systems that support the OFREP specification.
Features:
Related Issues
Closes #413
Follow-up Tasks
How to test
Manually tested