Conjure User-Agents supports arbitrary comment data

[PhoebeSzmucer]

Analogous to palantir/conjure-java-runtime-api#1286

[changelog-app]

Generate changelog in packages/conjure-client/changelog/@unreleased

What do the change types mean?

• feature: A new feature of the service.
• improvement: An incremental improvement in the functionality or operation of the service.
• fix: Remedies the incorrect behaviour of a component of the service in a backwards-compatible way.
• break: Has the potential to break consumers of this service's API, inclusive of both Palantir services
  and external consumers of the service's API (e.g. customer-written software or integrations).
• deprecation: Advertises the intention to remove service functionality without any change to the
  operation of the service itself.
• manualTask: Requires the possibility of manual intervention (running a script, eyeballing configuration,
  performing database surgery, ...) at the time of upgrade for it to succeed.
• migration: A fully automatic upgrade migration task with no engineer input required.

Note: only one type should be chosen.

How are new versions calculated?

• ❗The break and manual task changelog types will result in a major release!
• 🐛 The fix changelog type will result in a minor release in most cases, and a patch release version for patch branches. This behaviour is configurable in autorelease.
• ✨ All others will result in a minor version release.

Type

• Feature
• Improvement
• Fix
• Break
• Deprecation
• Manual task
• Migration

Description

Conjure User-Agents supports arbitrary comment data

Check the box to generate changelog(s)

• Generate changelog entry

Invalidated by push of 30cd2b2

[autorelease3]

Released 2.13.0

[ericjeney]

@PhoebeSzmucer Where does this get enforced, and what happens if a comment is provided that contains a character outside of this set?

[PhoebeSzmucer]

It's enforced on the conjure-java side palantir/conjure-java-runtime-api#1286

I felt like we don't want to validate here again, because it wouldn't be much safer. But I still wanted to mention this requirement, since the BE validates this.

Do you have another idea? I'm happy to open a FLUP PR to do something else.

[ericjeney]

I worry a bit that the "comments" terminology implies that it allows arbitrary text, including potentially user-entered text, which could lead applications to completely fail to load under particular conditions (e.g. when the text contains a comma). If we added % to this list, we could consider explicitly URL-encoding each comment?

In practice, we should never be including user-entered content in user agents due to log safety, so I think this is fine for our planned use-cases. Just feels like a bit more of a footgun than we typically leave around.

[ericjeney]

It looks like we'd also need to add !~*'( ) to this list to fully support URL-encoding.

Let's keep this as it is for now given it matches the BE behavior and works for how we intend to use it.