Skip to content

Conversation

@mauricefisher64
Copy link
Collaborator

Changes in this pull request

Support for 1.0 Claim claim_generator_hints field that was inadvertently removed.

Checklist

  • This PR represents a single feature, fix, or change.
  • All applicable changes have been documented.
  • Any TO DO items (or similar) have been entered as GitHub issues and the link to that issue has been included in a comment.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 10, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 78.80%. Comparing base (2395bd2) to head (cf0b7dc).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #915      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   78.81%   78.80%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         146      146              
  Lines       34646    34648       +2     
==========================================
- Hits        27307    27305       -2     
- Misses       7339     7343       +4     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Collaborator

@gpeacock gpeacock left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why support this? No one ever implemented it and it wasn't written to any claims. It was briefly in the spec, but removed quickly. Was there some test case that caused this to show up as an error?

@mauricefisher64
Copy link
Collaborator Author

We had a sample from a customer and we support other 1.0 features

Copy link
Collaborator

@gpeacock gpeacock left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why support this? No one ever implemented it and it wasn't written to any claims. It was briefly in the spec, but removed quickly. Was there some test case that caused this to show up as an error?

I guess it makes sense at this level to not call it an error, but we won't let you produce the field at the upper later or show it in our reports.

@mauricefisher64
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Makes sense

@mauricefisher64 mauricefisher64 merged commit e95c39a into main Feb 10, 2025
29 of 30 checks passed
@mauricefisher64 mauricefisher64 deleted the error_report branch February 10, 2025 22:11
@scouten-adobe scouten-adobe mentioned this pull request Feb 10, 2025
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.

3 participants