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

MTDSA-25842 - copy shared code across #181

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 24, 2024
Merged

MTDSA-25842 - copy shared code across #181

merged 2 commits into from
Sep 24, 2024

Conversation

jeremystone
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.


@Singleton
class Def1_AmendBenefitValidator(nino: String, taxYear: String, benefitId: String, body: JsValue) extends Validator[AmendBenefitRequestData] {

private val minYear = 1900
private val maxYear = 2100

@nowarn("cat=lint-byname-implicit")
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I assume we are removing this no-warn because this has since been patched? Aiven-Open/guardian-for-apache-kafka#86

@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ lazy val microservice = Project(appName, file("."))
update / evictionWarningOptions := EvictionWarningOptions.default.withWarnScalaVersionEviction(false),
scalaVersion := "2.13.12",
scalacOptions ++= List(
"-Xlint:-byname-implicit",
"-Xfatal-warnings",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah this makes sense to add that in! Cool :)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes. There were cases in shared that didn't have the "@nowarn" annotation. So had to put this in here and remove the one on the validator.

@@ -0,0 +1,152 @@
#! python3

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wasn't aware that we've already made a script for this. Should this be in another PR for clarity? Or because it's in BSAS, it should be part of this shared code moving? Not really sure but thought that this is interesting

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes. This is part of the shared code that needs to be copied from BSAS.

@Vedant-N421 Vedant-N421 merged commit f7b3780 into main Sep 24, 2024
1 check passed
@Vedant-N421 Vedant-N421 deleted the MTDSA-25842 branch September 24, 2024 13:51
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.

2 participants