Skip to content

feat(flagd): use json schema validation instead of custom validation #282

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

aepfli
Copy link
Member

@aepfli aepfli commented Jul 16, 2025

changed the code to rely on json schema instead of custom validation, should be more error proof for the future

@aepfli aepfli requested review from a team as code owners July 16, 2025 16:46
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 16, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 90.47%. Comparing base (72e6bd3) to head (4d36628).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #282      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   94.21%   90.47%   -3.74%     
==========================================
  Files          20        5      -15     
  Lines        1020      189     -831     
==========================================
- Hits          961      171     -790     
+ Misses         59       18      -41     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@aepfli aepfli force-pushed the feat/add-jsonschema-validator branch 14 times, most recently from c618aaf to c6211d0 Compare July 16, 2025 17:14
@aepfli aepfli force-pushed the feat/add-jsonschema-validator branch from c6211d0 to 049424a Compare July 16, 2025 17:20
Copy link
Member

@gruebel gruebel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice work

Signed-off-by: Simon Schrottner <[email protected]>
@aepfli aepfli marked this pull request as draft July 17, 2025 11:30
@aepfli
Copy link
Member Author

aepfli commented Jul 17, 2025

Basically it is a good change, but i see a lot of problems currently, with inconsistencies with other languages - and i think we should refine this a little bit better, before merging this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants