Skip to content

feat(runtime): declare required request fields and qualify installation callbacks - #82

Open
gael-obin wants to merge 1 commit into
codefly-dev:mainfrom
gael-obin:feat/required-request-fields-owner-review-20261102
Open

gael-obin wants to merge 1 commit into
codefly-dev:mainfrom
gael-obin:feat/required-request-fields-owner-review-20261102

Conversation

@gael-obin

@gael-obin gael-obin commented Nov 3, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

An operation's JSON request must express required key presence in the generated interface without inventing a second schema generator. RequiredFields adds that declaration to the existing runtime operation/interface path, creates a separate request definition per operation, and rejects invalid or misplaced wrappers. The installation receiver qualification fixture exercises the standard OnInstall/Serve path.

Classification: fix at the generic solution-runtime owner. No credential verifier, handler bypass or solution-specific field vocabulary is introduced. Tests cover named-type isolation, request-only use, invalid declarations and schema emission.

Depends on installation setup client, itself based on installation receiver. This PR contains only the ten additional selected files, applied over current main; local Go workspaces and existing setup implementations are excluded. The setup-client branch is fork-only, so it cannot be the base of an upstream stacked PR. The qualification fixture needs that dependency; this PR does not duplicate it.

Validation retained from the selected cohort: runtime build/vet and focused request-schema checks; real Accounts installation receiver crossing exercised refusal, acknowledgement, delay, failure, revocation and new-release cases. Subsequent local installation used the standard callback and retained existing records. Independent publication review matched all ten source files.

Merge/release qualification remains open: compatible released dependencies, generated-contract freshness and clean standalone/combined CI must be qualified before merging. The composed run used local owner selections; publishing source does not make the committed dependency graph reproduce it. No production installation or active-upgrade guarantee is claimed.

CI and review follow-up

Opened for review at the author’s request. Removing draft status does not certify merge or release readiness. This follow-up inspected the published head and logs; it made no implementation changes and did not rerun tests.

No CI checks are reported for this head. The linked installation receiver/client prerequisites and standalone/combined qualification remain required. No checks is not a passing CI result.

No submitted GitHub reviews, inline review comments, or conversation comments were present in the captured state. Independent publication/status audits are scoped evidence, not owner approval.

…on callbacks

Publish the previously exercised owner implementation for draft review.
@gael-obin
gael-obin marked this pull request as ready for review November 3, 2026 04:36
@gael-obin

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@antoinetoussaint-byte Please review the merge/release order for the runtime installation dependency chain. The downstream standalone build is blocked by the currently published runtime lacking the installation and required-field APIs; it is not being bypassed with a fork replacement or a skipped check.

  • Installation receiver is open at e6809f53797760ddf5e0934384f7371007379d84, with its reported test check green and the real-owner qualification limits documented in its body.
  • Setup client remains draft and explicitly blocked on the shared setup-authority contract and committed dependency selections. Its restrictions must be resolved before merge.
  • This PR (edaef47c1e4603f96b3c7c5257a5a5e6c564a381) is the separate main-based required-field/qualification carrier. It has no reported checks and must get clean owner and nested-fixture qualification against accepted dependencies before merge.

The setup contract depends on Core declarations, Authority, and the matching host setup path. Please review those contract decisions and the receiver-first order; this is a request to advance the blocked approval chain, not to merge red or unqualified work. This account has no upstream merge permission. No release or deployment is claimed.

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.

1 participant