Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Input validation might be good #129

Closed
ericfode opened this issue Sep 11, 2017 · 3 comments
Closed

Input validation might be good #129

ericfode opened this issue Sep 11, 2017 · 3 comments
Labels
waiting-reply waiting for more information (probably for a while)

Comments

@ericfode
Copy link

ericfode commented Sep 11, 2017 •
edited
Loading

It looks like most of these functions do nothing to keep you from passing invalid parameters to vault. It might be good if we did more.
@otakup0pe
Copy link
Contributor

It seems to me like addressing the root of #133 would help a ton with input validation. If I'm not missing something, I'll close this one out in favor of 133.

@otakup0pe otakup0pe added the waiting-reply waiting for more information (probably for a while) label Nov 9, 2017
@jeffwecan jeffwecan mentioned this issue Aug 6, 2018
Merged
@jeffwecan
Copy link
Member

FWIW, I started bumping up this again in #267. Still thinking about the best way to handle this sort of thing somewhat dynamically (at run-time) that works well for both Python 2.7 and 3.x...

@jeffwecan
Copy link
Member

This is something well keep in mind going forward, but without any recent input on the matter I figure we can close out the issue for now.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
waiting-reply waiting for more information (probably for a while)
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@ericfode @otakup0pe @jeffwecan