Skip to content

Conversation

andrueastman
Copy link
Contributor

Follow up to #642

Regression introduced due duplicate operation ids. The change doesn't seem like it was replicated in the v2 branch merge at #641. So no need of a second PR.

Copy link

Copy link
Member

@baywet baywet left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the fix, can you please also reflect the changes in v2?

@andrueastman andrueastman merged commit 145b584 into support/v1 Jan 22, 2025
14 checks passed
@andrueastman andrueastman deleted the andrueastman/fixRegression branch January 22, 2025 11:52
@andrueastman
Copy link
Contributor Author

Just to confirm here @baywet, the v2 PR didn't end up with the same regression if you compare the diff of the two PRs,
#642 and #641.

Furthermore, the assertions on the head of the main(v2) branch looks correct/consistent with what we expect.

Assert.Equal("Customers.Customer.MyFunction1.MyFunction2-c53d", operation1.OperationId);

@baywet
Copy link
Member

baywet commented Jan 23, 2025

Thank you for double checking!

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