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

Feature: Tweak Missing type to implicitly allow None values #48

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 26, 2023

Conversation

frankie567
Copy link
Contributor

As discussed in #47, I'm proposing this change to avoid issues when GitHub schema is not reliable regarding properties that are nullable or not.

Semantically, it's equivalent to say that "if the property is not required in the OpenAPI schema, we allow it to have the value null".

Copy link
Owner

@yanyongyu yanyongyu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just add a comment to mention the issue :)

Seems i do not have permission to apply changes.

githubkit/utils.py Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Ju4tCode <42488585+yanyongyu@users.noreply.github.com>
@frankie567
Copy link
Contributor Author

Comment added :)

@yanyongyu yanyongyu added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 26, 2023
@yanyongyu yanyongyu changed the title Tweak Missing type to implicitly allow None values Feature: Tweak Missing type to implicitly allow None values Sep 26, 2023
@yanyongyu yanyongyu added the schema schema related label Sep 26, 2023
@yanyongyu yanyongyu merged commit d01733b into yanyongyu:master Sep 26, 2023
@frankie567 frankie567 deleted the allow-implicit-none branch September 26, 2023 09:36
@yanyongyu yanyongyu linked an issue Sep 26, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request schema schema related
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Should Missing type implicitly allow None?
2 participants