Skip to content

Conversation

@mdellweg
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@mdellweg
Copy link
Member Author

@pedro-psb This would be my attempt at "solving" the oneOf.

@mdellweg mdellweg changed the title Pydantic improvements [PULP-741] Pydantic improvements Aug 18, 2025
@mdellweg mdellweg force-pushed the pydantic_improvements branch from f460fd0 to 0d4149a Compare August 18, 2025 08:50
@mdellweg mdellweg marked this pull request as ready for review August 18, 2025 11:08
Copy link
Member

@pedro-psb pedro-psb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't have the openapi-spec/oa-gen/pydantic expertise to tell if it would really behave as intended, but it's promissing.
I guess we can try it out if it passes basic tests. Can you add a test matrix to exercise all ranges? <3.70, >=3.70,<3.85 and >=3.85,<3.100. Or if you prefer, doing a manual test against 3.85 should be enough evidence.

@mdellweg mdellweg force-pushed the pydantic_improvements branch from 0d4149a to 9a8067f Compare August 19, 2025 10:33
@mdellweg mdellweg force-pushed the pydantic_improvements branch from 9a8067f to 2f5697e Compare August 20, 2025 14:57
Copy link
Member

@pedro-psb pedro-psb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The test PR is two week by now, but it went fine and I'm confident no major bind-wise thing changed since then.

@pedro-psb pedro-psb merged commit 2073cf5 into pulp:main Sep 3, 2025
4 checks passed
@mdellweg mdellweg deleted the pydantic_improvements branch September 4, 2025 08:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants