chore: superseded by clean operationId PR #337 - #332
Closed
seonghobae wants to merge 2 commits into
Closed
Conversation
|
Important Review skippedDraft detected. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the ⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: You can disable this status message by setting the Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
seonghobae
changed the title
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Superseded duplicate
Closed in favor of PR #337.
Fresh changed-file and blob comparison proves #332 and #337 carry the same two-file OpenAPI operationId contract:
scripts/openapi_operation_id_contract.py:700ed07d10fcd67f5a3dfdc8f4dc8547f87bc4e3;scripts/test_openapi_operation_id_contract.py:0b2fe4179374062652271c5a1899b59660a0b96d.#332's source semantics were correct, but its stale ancestry caused CI to fail after Maven because it lacked the protected-main Maven report verifier. #337 reconstructs the identical contract directly on protected
main55d7ae8647208e301f282350f076eeddaba61d11and is GREEN on CI31387420565, Security Scan31387420476, and SAST31387420373.Issue #315 remains open; unique operationIds are one bounded machine-readable API invariant, not complete versioning, schema parity, generated clients, or naruon compatibility.