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

fix(@xen-orchestra/rest-api): fix null values not displayed as nullable #8406

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 6, 2025

Conversation

MathieuRA
Copy link
Member

@MathieuRA MathieuRA commented Mar 4, 2025

Description

This option is required to not loose the nullable option on null properties when using dynamic type.
E.g.

type WithFoo <T> = T {foo: string} 
WithFoo<{bar: null | string}> 

Will return this openapi spec:

type: object,
properties: {
   bar: {
     type: string
   },
   foo: {
     type: string
   }
}

With this option enabled, it will generate a spec like:

type: object,
properties: {
   bar: {
     type: string,
     nullable: true
   },
   foo: {
     type: string
   }
}

Checklist

  • Commit
    • Title follows commit conventions
    • Reference the relevant issue (Fixes #007, See xoa-support#42, See https://...)
    • If bug fix, add Introduced by
  • Changelog
    • If visible by XOA users, add changelog entry
    • Update "Packages to release" in CHANGELOG.unreleased.md
  • PR
    • If UI changes, add screenshots
    • If not finished or not tested, open as Draft

Review process

This 2-passes review process aims to:

  • develop skills of junior reviewers
  • limit the workload for senior reviewers
  • limit the number of unnecessary changes by the author
  1. The author creates a PR.
  2. Review process:
    1. The author assigns the junior reviewer.
    2. The junior reviewer conducts their review:
      • Resolves their comments if they are addressed.
      • Adds comments if necessary or approves the PR.
    3. The junior reviewer assigns the senior reviewer.
    4. The senior reviewer conducts their review:
      • If there are no unresolved comments on the PR → merge.
      • Otherwise, we continue with 3.
  3. The author responds to comments and/or makes corrections, and we go back to 2.

Notes:

  1. The author can request a review at any time, even if the PR is still a Draft.
  2. In theory, there should not be more than one reviewer at a time.
  3. The author should not make any changes:
    • When a reviewer is assigned.
    • Between the junior and senior reviews.

@MathieuRA MathieuRA self-assigned this Mar 4, 2025
@MathieuRA MathieuRA requested a review from b-Nollet March 5, 2025 08:39
@MathieuRA MathieuRA marked this pull request as ready for review March 5, 2025 08:39
@b-Nollet b-Nollet requested a review from fbeauchamp March 5, 2025 15:56
Copy link
Collaborator

@fbeauchamp fbeauchamp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

comment error, please ignore

@fbeauchamp fbeauchamp merged commit a415c45 into master Mar 6, 2025
1 check passed
@fbeauchamp fbeauchamp deleted the fix-strickNullCheck branch March 6, 2025 08:23
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