Repository navigation
docs(const,vendor): Method.get cites RFC 959 §4 for a case-insensitivity rule stated in §5.3 #947
Description
Activity
- added
on Sep 30, 2026 - added a commit that references this issue
on Sep 30, 2026 Correcting my own framing: this is not a new finding, and the repo already ruled on it.
tests/protocols/application/test_ftp_unit.py:86-102has said so since #582:The citation is section 5.3 (COMMANDS, which gives the command syntax), not section 4.1 (FTP COMMANDS, which only lists the per-command semantics); #582 cited 4.1 and a cross-review caught it. Verified against the RFC text: the sentence sits between the 5.3 and 5.4 headings.
So §5.3-not-§4.1 was established once already, and the habit outlived the correction. That makes this a recurrence rather than a discovery, and it widens the scope: the same misattribution is on seven sites, not one —
pcapkit/const/http/method.py:268 pcapkit/vendor/http/method.py:173 docs/source/contributing/conventions/registry-protocol.rst:224,281,337,443 tests/const/test_const_enum_no_mint.py:2111Line 281 is the clearest: it cites
959#section-4.1directly above the quote "Upper and lower case alphabetic characters are to be treated identically" — §5.3's own sentence, attributed to §4.1 in the same table row.That same docstring also drew the distinction this issue needs:
ftp/command.py's citations are the command-kind claim, which §4 does support, so those are correct and are not in scope here.#946 now fixes the dead anchor at all thirteen
959sites (including two#section-5.3roles, also dead) but deliberately does not re-point any of these seven, because which section they should name is this issue's question. The choice is unchanged:#section-5is the finest live anchor,#page-45is where §5.3 begins, or reword the prose to stop attributing the rule to a section that does not state it.My lean is
#section-5, matching what #946 already did to the two roles that only carried the case claim. Still yours to call.Sure section-5 works
Ruling —
#section-5. Verbatim:Sure section-5 works
So the seven sites that attribute FTP command case-insensitivity to §4 now cite
:rfc:`959#section-5, the finest live anchor RFC 959 renders:pcapkit/const/http/method.py:268 pcapkit/vendor/http/method.py:173 docs/source/contributing/conventions/registry-protocol.rst:224,281,337,443 tests/const/test_const_enum_no_mint.py:2111#946already retargeted these to#section-4to kill the dead#section-4.1anchor; this moves them one further, to the section that actually states the rule. The twoftp/command.pypairs stay at#section-4— they carry the command-kind claim, which §4 does support, astests/protocols/application/test_ftp_unit.pyhas documented since #582.needs: decisionoff,wipon. Folding into #946 rather than raising a second PR, since it is the same files and the same defect class, and #946 has not merged.- added 4 commits that reference this issue
on Sep 30, 2026 Applied in #946 at
0d025d24d— six of the seven sites now cite:rfc:959#section-5``:pcapkit/const/http/method.py:268 pcapkit/vendor/http/method.py:173 tests/const/test_const_enum_no_mint.py:2111 docs/source/contributing/conventions/registry-protocol.rst:224, 281, 443The seventh,
registry-protocol.rst:337, is left at#section-4and flagged on the PR rather than moved. Its row claims the RFC presents the kind and conformance letters upper case (A/P/S,M/O/H), which is §4.1's command list — not §5.3's case-insensitivity rule. I had listed it among the seven when asking, so applying the ruling literally there would have made that citation worse.Staying
wipuntil #946 merges.- added 5 commits that reference this issue
on Sep 30, 2026 Done — #946 merged as
793aecd11. Verified onmainrather than on the branch:pcapkit/const/http/method.py section-5=1 section-4=0 pcapkit/vendor/http/method.py section-5=1 section-4=0 tests/const/test_const_enum_no_mint.py section-5=1 section-4=0 registry-protocol.rst section-5=3 section-4=1 pcapkit/const/ftp/command.py section-5=0 section-4=2All six sites this issue covers now cite
:rfc:959#section-5``, the section that actually states FTP command case-insensitivity. Thehttp/method.pypair stays byte-identical on the cited line.The five deliberate exceptions keep
#section-4, as recorded on the PR: the fourftp/command.pysites carry the command-kind claim, which §4 does support, andregistry-protocol.rst:337claims the RFC presents the kind and conformance letters upper case — §4.1's command list rather than §5.3's comparison rule. That last one I flagged rather than moved, since following this issue's ruling literally there would have made the citation worse. Say the word if you would rather it matched the others.Closing.
Describe the bug
Method.get's docstring explains its own case-sensitivity by contrast with FTP, and cites the wrong section of RFC 959 for the contrast:RFC 959 §4 is FILE TRANSFER FUNCTIONS and contains no case-sensitivity language at all. The statement is in §5.3 COMMANDS:
Reproduction
Line 2469 sits between
section-5(2333) andsection-6(2920), so it is inside §5, not §4. That is the only such sentence in the document — note it wraps across lines 2469-2470, so a single-line grep fortreated identicallyfinds nothing.Expected behavior
:rfc:959#section-5``, which is the finest anchor RFC 959 renders (onlysection-1..`section-8` exist, per #944). Alternatives: `#page-45`, where §5.3 begins, or leave `#section-4` and reword the prose to stop attributing the claim to a section that does not make it.Notes
959#section-4.1citations name an anchor RFC 959 does not have #944, which is about the anchor being dead. This is the anchor being live and wrong. docs(const,vendor): six :rfc:959#section-4.1citations name an anchor RFC 959 does not have #944's ruling ("Suresection-4is good.") was given before this was known, and docs: retarget every dead :rfc:959sub-section anchor (#944) #946 applies it to all six sites as ruled rather than widening scope — so this site currently cites a section that does not say what the docstring says it says.pcapkit/{const,vendor}/ftp/command.pypairs are fine: §4 does contain §4.1 FTP COMMANDS, which supports "type of kind of command".959sub-section anchor (#944) #946's cross-review finding. Template and generated copy, so both halves are hand-edited; no crawl or regeneration needed.#946's newKNOWN_DEAD_ANCHORSdenylist cannot catch this class — the anchor exists.System information
pcapkitcommit210bdb419, Python 3.14.7, CPython, Linux.