Allow directly specifiying connection path #5701
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
This looks great; I will merge it after we exit our test fixit. |
|
this is ok to test |
|
@nathanielmanistaatgoogle for external contributors, you need to use "this is ok to test" magic phrase allow the tests to actually run. |
Make insecure_channel / secure_channel accept port=None and only use the 'host' argument. This enables using UNIX sockets without mangling the path of the socket. Signed-off-by: Christian Svensson <blue@cmd.nu>
|
@jtattermusch: Does this need to be amended to remove the copyright update since we've changed our license header practices? Or can it be merged in its current state? |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Make insecure_channel / secure_channel accept port=None and only use the
'host' argument. This enables using UNIX sockets without mangling the
path of the socket.
The API would be clearer if port somehow was optional (like passing a (host, port) tuple like a lot of other Python libraries are using) but to maintain compatibility with the current users this solution is proposed.
This provides relief for #4974