Quarkus LTS 3.20.0 upgrade #6296
Conversation
porcelli
force-pushed
the
kie-issues#1908
branch
from
0c08f19 to
06805e0
Compare
| public static final String X_DMN_EXCLUSIVE_MINIMUM_VALUE = "x-dmn-exclusive-minimum-value"; | ||
| public static final String X_DMN_EXCLUSIVE_MAXIMUM_VALUE = "x-dmn-exclusive-maximum-value"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gitgabrio @yesamer @baldimir the semantics of exclusive-maximum and exclusive-minimum has changed.
| @@ -64,7 +65,7 @@ public static void populateSchemaFromUnaryTests(Schema toPopulate, List<DMNUnary | |||
| throw new IllegalArgumentException("At most one null value is allowed for enum definition"); | |||
| } | |||
| // If there is a NullNode, the item is nullable | |||
| toPopulate.setNullable(!nullNodes.isEmpty()); | |||
| toPopulate.addExtension(X_NULLABLE, !nullNodes.isEmpty()); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gitgabrio @yesamer @baldimir this also changed, no more native nullable
| toPopulate.addExtension(DMNOASConstants.X_DMN_EXCLUSIVE_MAXIMUM_VALUE, range.getHighEndPoint()); | ||
| } else { | ||
| toPopulate.addExtension(DMNOASConstants.X_DMN_MAXIMUM_VALUE, range.getHighEndPoint()); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gitgabrio @yesamer @baldimir the semantics of exclusive-maximum and exclusive-minimum has changed.
| toPopulate.exclusiveMaximum(bigDecimal); | ||
| } else { | ||
| toPopulate.maximum(bigDecimal); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gitgabrio @yesamer @baldimir the semantics of exclusive-maximum and exclusive-minimum has changed.
| toPopulate.addExtension(DMNOASConstants.X_DMN_EXCLUSIVE_MINIMUM_VALUE, range.getLowEndPoint()); | ||
| } else { | ||
| toPopulate.addExtension(DMNOASConstants.X_DMN_MINIMUM_VALUE, range.getLowEndPoint()); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gitgabrio @yesamer @baldimir the semantics of exclusive-maximum and exclusive-minimum has changed.
| toPopulate.exclusiveMinimum(bigDecimal); | ||
| } else { | ||
| toPopulate.minimum(bigDecimal); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gitgabrio @yesamer @baldimir the semantics of exclusive-maximum and exclusive-minimum has changed.
| @@ -123,10 +121,8 @@ void populateSchemaWithRangesForTypeConstraints() { | |||
| SimpleTypeImpl toRead = getSimpleType(null, typeConstraintsString, FEEL_STRING, BuiltInType.STRING); | |||
| AtomicReference<Schema> toPopulate = new AtomicReference<>(getSchemaForSimpleType(toRead)); | |||
| DMNTypeSchemas.populateSchemaWithConstraints(toPopulate.get(), toRead); | |||
| assertThat(toPopulate.get().getMinimum()).isEqualTo(BigDecimal.ONE); | |||
| assertThat(toPopulate.get().getExclusiveMinimum()).isTrue(); | |||
| assertThat(toPopulate.get().getExclusiveMinimum()).isEqualTo(BigDecimal.ONE); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gitgabrio @yesamer @baldimir the semantics of exclusive-maximum and exclusive-minimum has changed.
| assertThat(toPopulate.getExtensions().get(DMNOASConstants.X_DMN_MAXIMUM_VALUE)).isEqualTo(expectedDates.get(1)); | ||
| assertThat(toPopulate.getExclusiveMaximum()).isFalse(); | ||
| assertThat(toPopulate.getExtensions().get(DMNOASConstants.X_DMN_EXCLUSIVE_MAXIMUM_VALUE)).isNull(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gitgabrio @yesamer @baldimir the semantics of exclusive-maximum and exclusive-minimum has changed.
…cent config file from ispn
|
Hi @porcelli, as I wrote on the mailing list here https://lists.apache.org/thread/4khkoyq3x6v5zd7hmolpwyyjfstxczzq, @AnnJoy23 is already working on it for some time. Should I ask her to stop and scratch her work, please? |
Closes: apache/incubator-kie-issues#1908
Related PR:
#6296
apache/incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes#3873
apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner#3172
apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps#2207