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

Issues found in content safety modular #1974

Closed
3 tasks
qiaozha opened this issue Aug 16, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1975
Closed
3 tasks

Issues found in content safety modular #1974

qiaozha opened this issue Aug 16, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1975
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@qiaozha
Copy link
Member

qiaozha commented Aug 16, 2023

To summarize all issues we found in content safety DPG generation

  1. Model name with Options suffix.
  2. Model name for paged result is CustomPage
  3. Serialized body type is incorrect.
  4. Default value in outputType.

See details from this comment in the draft PR #1975

As we are targeting GA the DPG version for content safety. we need to consider some unresolved issues when we found in Modular

Tasks

  1. DPG/RLC Backlog HRLC
  2. DPG/RLC Backlog HRLC
  3. HRLC RLC
    qiaozha
@joheredi
Copy link
Member

Upon reviewing the main issues, I believe we should be able to resolve them within the next few weeks, aiming for a beta release by the end of September. @qiaozha, do you agree with this assessment?

Regarding the second section:

Issues #1 and #2 may require prompt attention, but they are not necessarily blocking. As a temporary solution, we could generate ApiViews for each sub-path.

For issue #3, we should definitely remove the /rest sub-path export prior to GA. We could remove the generated RLC and switch to the published RLC package post-GA as a minor update, as it wouldn't lead to any API changes. If we can achieve this before GA, great! But we should prioritize other critical issues first.

@qiaozha qiaozha added the HRLC label Aug 17, 2023
@qiaozha
Copy link
Member Author

qiaozha commented Aug 18, 2023

For the default value issue, because of the reasons mentioned here #1975 (comment), we decide to not set any default value for optional parameters in PR #1977

@qiaozha
Copy link
Member Author

qiaozha commented Aug 18, 2023

close it as have created separate issues for the rest tasks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants