-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20
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: Correct spelling for model class TableMetadataModification #44
Conversation
Isn't this a breaking change needing a major version bump? I suppose alternatively we could have keep the old version around, documented to be deprecated, and change the typing everywhere to be Edit: Or change |
I was planning on asking some questions about that. It does constitute a breaking change, and I'm not sure of the best practice for handling that. Also interested in @mure 's opinion. |
Oof, that's pretty bad 🤦♂️ That being said, I don't think anyone has really starting using the client yet, and it's even more unlikely that someone was calling the modify tables method. This is why I was hesitant to rush out the 1.0 release :/ Let me do some tinkering to see what our options are. |
I think we can just add this line to the bottom of # Alias to provide backwards compatibility for misnamed class, fixed in 1.0.2
TableMetdataModification = TableMetadataModification |
Co-authored-by: Paul Spangler <spanglerco@users.noreply.github.com>
What does this Pull Request accomplish?
TableMetdataModification -> TableMetadataModification
Why should this Pull Request be merged?
Correcting spelling of a model class.
What testing has been done?
Ran tests locally.