Force id to be mandatory #284
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <ftirados@redhat.com>
fjtirado
force-pushed
the
id_really_mandatory
branch
from
01a4c01 to
44d6996
Compare
|
This PR partially reverts what was done in this one: The author in that commit, by adding Originally, the SDK forced the |
ricardozanini
approved these changes
Oct 27, 2023
|
@manick02 can you take a look too please? |
cdavernas
approved these changes
Oct 31, 2023
# for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
# to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Many thanks for submitting your Pull Request ❤️!
What this PR does / why we need it:
This makes id mandatory, keeping current constructor unchanged from the previous version
Special notes for reviewers:
Additional information (if needed):
SDK has currently two misaligments with the spec: id and name are mandatory, while the former is mandatory only if there is no key and the latter is optional. Since making id optionally depending on key is not a good idea that will be probably changed in 0.9 (where ID will be mandatory always and key removed or make optional), I think is better to postpone the API breaking change to the migration to 0.9