This repository was archived by the owner on Aug 5, 2021. It is now read-only.
Add usageType to premissions required fields #558
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
- usageType field was missing from the required fields for .releases.permissions field. This was causing false validations
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Summary
usageTypefield was missing from the required fields for .releases.permissions field. This was causing false validations.This PR fixes/implements the following bugs/features
Explain the motivation for making this change. What existing problem does the pull request solve?
usageTypefield was missing from the required fields for .releases.permissions field. This was causing false validations.The schema had to be updated to reflect the intent of the documentation we've released and the validations made by the harvester.
Test plan (required)
No code was changed. Only the 2.0 schema was updated.
Visual test of validation working as intended:
Closing issues
Closes #557