Always treat encoding as a string for encoding.trim()

[COBOL-Erik]

encoding.trim() only works if encoding is interpreted as a string, but it might just be a number.

What It Does

How to Test

Review Checklist
I certify that I have:

• tested my changes
• added/updated automated tests
• updated the changelog
• followed the contribution guidelines

Additional Comments

[zFernand0]

Hey @COBOL-Erik,
The fix LGTM! 😋

Curious if you could:

• Add a Changelog entry to the packages/zosjobs/src/CHANGELOG.md file?
• (maybe) add a quick test for the encoding being a number? 🙏

[COBOL-Erik]

Hey @COBOL-Erik, The fix LGTM! 😋

Curious if you could:

• Add a Changelog entry to the packages/zosjobs/src/CHANGELOG.md file?
• (maybe) add a quick test for the encoding being a number? 🙏

Hi!
I added a change log entry. Not sure how I would add a test, though. Could you help me out?

[zFernand0]

Left a few comments to address.

Note: even though typescript should prevent people from calling the getSpoolContentById with a number e.g. 939 as the encoding value, nothing prevents people from bypassing it 😋

And for the test, you could add a new one in:

• packages/zosjobs/__tests__/__unit__/GetJobs.unit.test.ts

And you could copy the following test to create a new one:

• it("should return spool content from getSpoolContentById with encoding if z/OSMF response is mocked" ...

And the resulting test might look something like this:

        it("should return spool content from getSpoolContentById with encoding as a number if z/OSMF response is mocked", async () => {
            (ZosmfRestClient.getExpectString as any) = mockGetJobsStringData(GetJobsData.SAMPLE_JES_MSG_LG);
            const content = await GetJobs.getSpoolContentById(pretendSession, "MYJOB1", "JOB0123", 1, 939 as any);
            expect((ZosmfRestClient.getExpectString as any).mock.calls[0][1]).toContain("fileEncoding=939");
            expect(content).toEqual(GetJobsData.SAMPLE_JES_MSG_LG);
        });

[COBOL-Erik]

I have tried to do everything by the book now. I'm sure I have missed something... Where are we?

[t1m0thyj]

I have tried to do everything by the book now. I'm sure I have missed something... Where are we?

There were 2 commits that were not properly signed off:

Commit sha: 2d7b68d, Author: S38453, Committer: S38453; The sign-off is missing.
Commit sha: 5ae8fbc, Author: S38453, Committer: S38453; Expected "S38453 [email protected]", but got "COBOL-Erik [email protected]".

I've rebased the PR to amend these commits so the DCO check should be passing now. As the Audit check is failing on master branch, you don't need to worry about it. 🙂

In the future, please ensure when making Git commits that your Git author is set to COBOL-Erik (not S38453), and either pass the --signoff flag on the git commit command or include the "Signed-off-by" line in your commit message.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
96.9% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[t1m0thyj]

LGTM, thanks @COBOL-Erik!

[traeok]

Thanks for the fix @COBOL-Erik!

Changes were addressed

[github-actions]

Release succeeded for the master branch. 🎉

The following packages have been published:

• npm: @zowe/[email protected]
• npm: @zowe/[email protected]

_{Powered by Octorelease 🚀}