lxbme opened a new pull request, #3451:
URL: https://github.com/apache/apisix-dashboard/pull/3451

   The gateway-contract test keeps an allowlist of gateway fields the zod 
schemas deliberately do not model, each with a written reason, and asserts the 
allowlist has no stale entries. That staleness check is currently failing on 
`master`:
   
   ```
   FAIL  src/types/schema/apisix/gateway-contract.test.ts > stream_route
   - "staleAllow": []
   + "staleAllow": ["name"]
   ```
   
   The `stream_route.name` entry documented a gap that no longer exists. It was 
written when the read schema did not model `name`; `StreamRoute` now declares 
`name: z.string()`, so the field is covered and the entry is obsolete. Removing 
it is the whole change — `pnpm test` goes from 83/84 to 84/84.
   
   The two sides landed independently, which is precisely the drift this check 
exists to catch: a gap gets closed, and its allowlist entry is left behind 
claiming a limitation that is no longer real. Working as intended.
   
   ### Why this is not visible as a red `master`
   
   `.github/workflows/lint.yml` — the workflow that runs `pnpm test` — has:
   
   ```yaml
   on:
     push:
       branches:
         - main        # this repository's default branch is `master`
     pull_request:
       branches:
         - "**"
   ```
   
   The push filter names `main`, so the workflow never runs on pushes to 
`master`. It does run on every pull request, so the failure surfaces on **every 
open and future PR** rather than on `master` itself. That trigger mismatch is a 
separate issue and is intentionally left out of this change.
   
   ### Verification
   
   - `pnpm test` — 84/84 (was 83/84, contract test 11/11)
   - `pnpm lint`, `pnpm exec tsc -b` — clean


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to