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

[NET-3700] add omitempty to api prepared query targets #18184

Merged

Conversation

zalimeni
Copy link
Member

@zalimeni zalimeni commented Jul 19, 2023

Manual backport of c2bbe67.

Description

This change is needed to address client errors for consumers of the api submodule. Backporting to the only release line the bug exists in (1.16).

No changelog was added for the original fix in main, so will add one in a separate change in main and backport it.

Testing & Reproduction steps

I expect automated tests to continue to pass.

PR Checklist

  • updated test coverage
  • external facing docs updated
  • appropriate backport labels added
  • not a security concern

Manual backport of c2bbe67.

Co-authored-by: Michael Zalimeni <michael.zalimeni@hashicorp.com>
@zalimeni zalimeni added type/bug Feature does not function as expected theme/api Relating to the HTTP API interface pr/no-backport labels Jul 19, 2023
@zalimeni zalimeni added the pr/no-changelog PR does not need a corresponding .changelog entry label Jul 19, 2023
@zalimeni zalimeni marked this pull request as ready for review July 19, 2023 14:32
@nfi-hashicorp
Copy link
Collaborator

No changelog was added for the original fix in main, so will add one in a separate change in main and backport it.

Whoops, my bad

@zalimeni
Copy link
Member Author

Whoops, my bad

@nfi-hashicorp no sweat! There was a lot happening in the first PR - just wanted to call out as a follow-up and so I don't forget

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
pr/no-backport pr/no-changelog PR does not need a corresponding .changelog entry theme/api Relating to the HTTP API interface type/bug Feature does not function as expected
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants