Return folder with verified certificates

[jannejy]

Describe your changes

Issue ticket number and link

Checklist before requesting a review

• I have performed a self-review of my code
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• I read the contribution documentation and made sure that my changes meet its requirements

[jannejy]

PR in libocpp: EVerest/libocpp#852

[AssemblyJohn]

This doesn't look good to me. The behavior has been changed to only return the directory in which the bundle of roots is located. This will break all existing usage that depend on the file that contains the latest valid root, since not everyone is using directories.

If one requires the directory in which the bundle is located, it can be extracted from the returned path, for example:
std::filesystem::path directory_of_bundle = std::filesystem::path(certificate_single).parent_path();

Modifying code from existing functionality is never advised.

However, if a separate function that is clear and returns the location instead the bundle file is required, then it's better to create a new one in order to preserve backwards compatibility.

[jannejy]

This doesn't look good to me. The behavior has been changed to only return the directory in which the bundle of roots is located. This will break all existing usage that depend on the file that contains the latest valid root, since not everyone is using directories.

Actually, not only directory, that is also checked in the tests here.

Modifying code from existing functionality is never advised.

However, if a separate function that is clear and returns the location instead the bundle file is required, then it's better to create a new one in order to preserve backwards compatibility.

Anyway, I agree, that the changing of the interface is anot good idea. I'll add the implementaion for the location (as well as files as directories).

[AssemblyJohn]

Now it looks good, however make sure that in libocpp code, you are handling both the case of a directory and of a bundle file.