Remove default check for is_set #61
Merged
+113
−448
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…les are checked. Also, is_valid does not generate a warning for a rule violation of a subfield. This is somewhat redundant. Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
…nterface check. The documentation has been adjusted accordingly Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
…ing for every field with non-valid sub-fields does not make any sense and clutters up the warning output. Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
…eld-is-required Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
jdsika
added
feature request
jdsika
reviewed
May 16, 2024
|
|
||
| [source,yaml] | ||
| ---- | ||
| EnvironmentalConditions: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Don't you think that we have to explain how to work with these rules?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The explanation of how to write rules is in "writing-rules.adoc". Here I added some explanation of the rules that are given as errors in the example trace file and removed the rest.
For the future, I would create a new trace file containing more examples of rule violations and then explain them here. But I would do that after the planned major rework of osi-validation.
|
Did you update the osi version? |
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
Signed-off-by: ClemensLinnhoff <clemens.linnhoff@partner.bmw.de>
jdsika
approved these changes
May 16, 2024
jdsika
deleted the
51-enable-setting-a-rule-to-define-if-a-field-is-required
branch
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Reference to a related issue in the repository
#51
also fixes #52
Add a description
Remove automatically checking for is_set. Now only explicit is_set rules are checked. Also, is_valid does not generate a warning for a rule violation of a subfield. This is somewhat redundant.
Mention a member
@jdsika
Check the checklist