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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Implements #67. Add an else clause to allow a nested object property #90

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Mar 25, 2019
Merged

Implements #67. Add an else clause to allow a nested object property #90

merged 8 commits into from
Mar 25, 2019

Conversation

kmp1
Copy link

@kmp1 kmp1 commented Oct 26, 2018

I also had issue #67 and it seems like it's a simple thing to fix (I can totally be wrong here, since I'm just idly perusing this code base) - I added an else clause to the nested-property template to allow objects to pass through (copying the one from array, because I don't know what I'm doing) and it seemed to resolve the issue.

trieloff
trieloff approved these changes Nov 1, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@trieloff trieloff left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The change looks good. @kmp1 do you have a test case too?

@kmp1
Copy link
Author

kmp1 commented Nov 1, 2018

I've added the example I used which is the one from the original issue slightly modified - it's in examples/schemas/nestedobj.schema.json

@mshaposhnik
Copy link

mshaposhnik commented Jan 29, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Can someone merge this, please? Because object described in another object still fails.

@mshaposhnik
Copy link

@trieloff something still blocking from merge ?

@trieloff
Copy link
Collaborator

  • the existing tests are breaking
  • there is no test that covers the change/use case

@eddyoc
Copy link

eddyoc commented Mar 13, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Any update on this? For now I have manually patched the changes from this branch. Now working perfectly for me. Be nice to see these changes merged.

@trieloff
Copy link
Collaborator

@eddyoc if you have tests in your private patch, I'd love to include them in this PR and get it merged, but we need to make sure it's compatible with existing tests (failing right now) and also tested in it's own right.

@anjankaur anjankaur requested a review from trieloff March 25, 2019 14:59
@trieloff trieloff merged commit d27a8e1 into adobe:master Mar 25, 2019
@mshaposhnik
Copy link

👍

@mshaposhnik
Copy link

It's time for 1.1.1 :)

@trieloff trieloff mentioned this pull request Mar 26, 2019
Closed
trieloff added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 26, 2019
@trieloff
fix(release): Fix release process
6bf5a10 
BREAKING CHANGE: Major version bump

#109 #90
trieloff pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 26, 2019
@semantic-release-bot
chore(release): 2.0.0 [skip ci]
1722535 
# [2.0.0](v1.0.0...v2.0.0) (2019-03-26)

### Bug Fixes

* **release:** Fix release process ([6bf5a10](6bf5a10)), closes [#109](#109) [#90](#90)

### BREAKING CHANGES

* **release:** Major version bump
@trieloff
Copy link
Collaborator

🎉 This PR is included in version 2.0.0 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

@Relequestual Relequestual mentioned this pull request Apr 1, 2019
Closed
3 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@trieloff trieloff trieloff approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
released
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@kmp1 @mshaposhnik @trieloff @eddyoc @anjankaur