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.

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

Revert commits breaking API and binary OCPP 1.6 passwords #352

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

robert-s-ubi
Copy link
Contributor

These commits were based on a misunderstanding of the OCPP-J 1.6 specification, which clearly states that the password is a byte sequence and not a string. Also, they broke the ServerEvents#authenticateSession() API:

Revert "More password fixes."

This reverts commit fb5d0fb.

Revert "Fix password decoding."

This reverts commit cf20205.

Revert "Recommended by 1.6 spec is a 20 byte (40 chars) key."

This reverts commit f7b92a3.

This commit breaks the API, because the behaviour of the method is changed to return the last configuration instead of the default configuration:

Revert "A single instace, otherwise a static get() method makes no sense."

This reverts commit 953f50b.

These commits were based on a misunderstanding of the OCPP-J 1.6
specification, which clearly states that the password is a byte sequence
and not a string:

Revert "More password fixes."

This reverts commit fb5d0fb.

Revert "Fix password decoding."

This reverts commit cf20205.

Revert "Recommended by 1.6 spec is a 20 byte (40 chars) key."

This reverts commit f7b92a3.

This commit breaks the API, because the behaviour of the method is
changed to return the last configuration instead of the default
configuration:

Revert "A single instace, otherwise a static get() method makes no sense."

This reverts commit 953f50b.
@robert-s-ubi
Copy link
Contributor Author

robert-s-ubi commented Jun 28, 2024

This PR reverts the repository back to the state as of commit 14d60bc (Update gson), which was the only valid commit in the series. The other ones only broke things.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant