Skip to content
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

feat(validation): Add partial support for "readOnly" properties. #361

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

arikkfir
Copy link

@arikkfir arikkfir commented Jan 3, 2025

This change adds support for properties marked with the JSON schema's "readOnly" marker, by preventing them from being sent in JSON payloads.

This change adds support for properties marked with the JSON schema's
"readOnly" marker, by preventing them from being sent in JSON payloads.
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 3, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 66.07143% with 19 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 73.03%. Comparing base (d963216) to head (b775ce4).
Report is 127 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...idation/readOnlyAndRequired/readOnlyAndRequired.go 44.44% 9 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
tests/data/validation/readOnly/readOnly.go 50.00% 6 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #361      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   76.58%   73.03%   -3.55%     
==========================================
  Files          24       45      +21     
  Lines        1892     2893    +1001     
==========================================
+ Hits         1449     2113     +664     
- Misses        354      603     +249     
- Partials       89      177      +88     

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

@arikkfir
Copy link
Author

arikkfir commented Jan 3, 2025

Seems like the coverage report complaint refers to the Go files in the tests directory, which are basically used as golden files, not real source code - perhaps they can be excluded from the calculation by adding the exclude property to the codecov action?

Something like this (in development.yaml workflow):

- name: Upload coverage to Codecov
  uses: codecov/codecov-action@v5
  with:
    exclude: tests

@arikkfir arikkfir closed this Jan 3, 2025
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.

2 participants