Stay more compatible with 1.0.0 #10
Open
Conversation
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
rockymontana
requested review from
mattiasmelin,
anders-matsonius,
chrisburkh,
muhfa-ist and
andreibastun
vershnik
approved these changes
Nov 27, 2023
| required: | ||
| - errors | ||
| - trace | ||
| - type |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Any reason why type is required? Seems to be a breaking change compared to 1.0.0.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess it could be removed. It's not required per se, but if it's not precent it should default to about/blank - which is quite useless. Should I remove it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
More more info: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9457#name-type
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR reverts the strange model that I made a PR for last month.
That one came with a lot of changes on structure and wasn't at all similar to version 1.0.0
Thank you @mattiasmelin for noticing that.
However, this one comes with some changes that makes me wonder if some of it is a bit redundant.
Title and errors.*.message seems like they could be the same thing
Will the errors ever contain more than one item in reality?