Skip to content
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

MODEXPW-498 - HoldingsRecordsSource schema alignment #76

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 12, 2024

Conversation

khandramai
Copy link
Contributor

MODEXPW-498 - HoldingsRecordsSource schema alignment

Purpose

Schema folio-export-common/schemas/inventory/holdingsRecordsSource.json at master · folio-org/folio-export-common should be aligned with mod-inventory-storage/ramls/holdings-sources/holdingsRecordsSource.json at master · folio-org/mod-inventory-storage .

Approach

TODOS and Open Questions

Learning

Pre-Merge Checklist:

Before merging this PR, please go through the following list and take appropriate actions.

  • Does this PR meet or exceed the expected quality standards?
    • Code coverage on new code is 80% or greater
    • Duplications on new code is 3% or less
    • There are no major code smells or security issues
  • Does this introduce breaking changes?
    • Were any API paths or methods changed, added or removed?
    • Were there any schema changes?
    • Did any of the interface versions change?
    • Were permissions changed, added, or removed?
    • Are there new interface dependencies?
    • There are no breaking changes in this PR.

If there are breaking changes, please STOP and consider the following:

  • What other modules will these changes impact?
  • Do JIRAs exist to update the impacted modules?
    • If not, please create them
    • Do they contain the appropriate level of detail? Which endpoints/schemas changed, etc.
    • Do they have all they appropriate links to blocked/related issues?
  • Are the JIRAs under active development?
    • If not, contact the project's PO and make sure they're aware of the urgency.
  • Do PRs exist for these changes?
    • If so, have they been approved?

Ideally all of the PRs involved in breaking changes would be merged in the same day to avoid breaking the folio-testing environment. Communication is paramount if that is to be achieved, especially as the number of intermodule and inter-team dependencies increase.

While it's helpful for reviewers to help identify potential problems, ensuring that it's safe to merge is ultimately the responsibility of the PR assignee.

@khandramai khandramai self-assigned this Aug 12, 2024
@khandramai khandramai requested a review from a team August 12, 2024 14:10
@khandramai khandramai merged commit 4aae4a2 into master Aug 12, 2024
3 checks passed
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