Skip to content

common adaptor should use new expandReferences API #306

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

Closed
josephjclark opened this issue Jul 14, 2023 · 8 comments
Closed

common adaptor should use new expandReferences API #306

josephjclark opened this issue Jul 14, 2023 · 8 comments
Assignees

Comments

@josephjclark
Copy link
Collaborator

To be done urgently

@josephjclark
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Adding this to the HTTP epic - although really it's a common 2.0 epic.

Since we're about to bump to common 2.0, we should do this.

Just like in #315, this will break compatibility with many adaptors. But semver will protect us from the worst of the damage, and the the worst-case scenario fix is to put out a patch release with an updated package json.

I think it's important that common 2.0 has a nice clean code base, because it's going to set the standard across the repo.

@josephjclark
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Common is not going to be bumped to 2.0 right now. I'm reducing the priority on this.

@taylordowns2000 taylordowns2000 moved this to Icebox in v2 Feb 3, 2024
josephjclark pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jun 11, 2024
@josephjclark
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I don't think there's anything left to do here? Maybe someone can investigate?

There are 3 closely related issues: I'd love to close, merge or fix them together: see also #317 and #307

@martalovescoffee
Copy link
Collaborator

@josephjclark Can you provide a bit more information on what should be investigated. It's a bit hard to understand.

@aleksa-krolls
Copy link
Member

@hunterachieng this issue still need estimates

@josephjclark
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Yes this is mess 😅 We actually need to consolidate all 3 issues into one, and scope the exact work that's needed next.

If @hunterachieng is estimating can we book a call to discuss and tidy this up?

@hunterachieng
Copy link
Contributor

@josephjclark yes we can discuss it. I have removed the estimate

@martalovescoffee
Copy link
Collaborator

1h for making the estimate and new issue with actual dev estimate.

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Icebox to Done in v2 Apr 7, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Archived in project
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants