Skip to content

fix #3697: closing the initial interceptor response #3699

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
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 3, 2022
Merged

fix #3697: closing the initial interceptor response #3699

merged 1 commit into from
Jan 3, 2022

Conversation

shawkins
Copy link
Contributor

@shawkins shawkins commented Dec 28, 2021 •
edited by manusa
Loading

Description

Fix #3697
Fix #3699

To address #3697 the previous interceptor response needs explicitly closed before issuing the next call. This was handled by each interceptor previously, but due to the refactoring it needs to be elevated to the adapter.

Type of change

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • Feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change
  • Chore (non-breaking change which doesn't affect codebase;
    test, version modification, documentation, etc.)

Checklist

  • Code contributed by me aligns with current project license: Apache 2.0
  • I Added CHANGELOG entry regarding this change
  • I have implemented unit tests to cover my changes
  • I have added/updated the javadocs and other documentation accordingly
  • No new bugs, code smells, etc. in SonarCloud report
  • I tested my code in Kubernetes
  • I tested my code in OpenShift

@centos-ci
Copy link

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@shawkins shawkins mentioned this pull request Dec 28, 2021
Closed
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

100.0% 100.0% Coverage
0.0% 0.0% Duplication

@rohanKanojia rohanKanojia mentioned this pull request Dec 28, 2021
Closed
manusa
manusa approved these changes Jan 3, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@manusa manusa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thx!

@manusa manusa added this to the 5.12.0 milestone Jan 3, 2022
@andreaTP andreaTP mentioned this pull request Jan 3, 2022
Closed
@manusa manusa merged commit 36b620b into fabric8io:master Jan 3, 2022
@Hillelmed
Copy link

Wait for this :D

@Hillelmed
Copy link

Hillelmed commented Jan 4, 2022 •
edited
Loading

/cc @oscerd @metacosm Awaiting your approval 👍

@Hillelmed
Copy link

Hillelmed commented Jan 5, 2022 •
edited
Loading

@metacosm :) we wait only for you..

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@manusa manusa manusa approved these changes

@oscerd oscerd oscerd approved these changes

@andreaTP andreaTP andreaTP approved these changes

@rohanKanojia rohanKanojia rohanKanojia approved these changes

@metacosm metacosm Awaiting requested review from metacosm

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
5.12.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

get() seems to be leaking OkHttp connections in 5.11
7 participants
@shawkins @centos-ci @Hillelmed @manusa @oscerd @andreaTP @rohanKanojia