You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Commit 348860c
Browse filesBrowse the repository at this point in the historyBrowse files
feat(spec): refuse authored radio + multiple:true at the schema layer (ruled Option C) (#11560)
FieldSchema's superRefine now rejects the authored combination with a
diagnostic naming the field, the illegal pair, and the three correctly-named
multi-choice types (checkboxes / multiselect / tags). MULTI_CAPABLE_TYPES and
isMultiValueField stay untouched per the same ruling (at-rest data keeps its
read path; a pin trips a future cleanup), and the objectql record-validator
select/radio branch stays as a data-safety fallback. multiple materializes
.default(false), so the refusal can only fire on an authored true and
parse(parse(x)) stays stable (pinned).
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T9cDbY2NBiVJWYx3BpWfH2
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
combination has zero occurrences, so no existing metadata is invalidated. The
46
+
ruling attaches an explicit flip condition: if deployed tenant metadata
47
+
carrying the combination with stored data is ever found, entrance rejection
48
+
alone would strand it and the set-narrowing option becomes required.
49
+
50
+
<!-- adr-0087: not-required (no-migration-prescription) The ruling explicitly declines a migration: at-rest data keeps its read path via the untouched MULTI_CAPABLE_TYPES / isMultiValueField, and re-measurement at the merge base found zero occurrences of the refused combination in either repo, so there is no existing author to migrate and nothing objectstack migrate meta is authorized to rewrite — a conversion rewriting the pair would itself be the stored-shape migration Option C was chosen to avoid. Guidance for future authors lives in the refusal diagnostic itself. -->
0 commit comments