Aman-Mittal opened a new pull request, #862:
URL: https://github.com/apache/fineract-backoffice-ui/pull/862
The same commit as #857, carried on a branch that CI will test. **#857 can
be closed as superseded** — its content is here unchanged, with
`github-actions[bot]` preserved as the author.
## Why #857 has no checks
Not a broken workflow — a documented consequence of one. `api-spec-sync.yml`
opens its pull request with `token: ${{ secrets.SPEC_SYNC_TOKEN || github.token
}}`, and the comment beside it already says why that matters:
```yaml
# PR — the default GITHUB_TOKEN cannot trigger workflows, so
token: ${{ secrets.SPEC_SYNC_TOKEN || github.token }}
```
With no `SPEC_SYNC_TOKEN` configured it falls back to `github.token`, and
GitHub will not start workflows for a pull request that token created. #857
therefore sits at **0 checks** — not pending, not failing, simply never started
— and cannot satisfy branch protection. Every weekly sync will arrive the same
way until that secret exists. Adding it is the permanent fix and is the one
thing here I cannot do myself.
## What the sync contains
Upstream moved from `apache/fineract@sha256:cf70ef44…` (fetched 26 October)
to `sha256:3bf81a6a…`. I confirmed that digest independently against Docker
Hub's registry before trusting the provenance file. The spec's own shape is
unchanged — `infoVersion` 1.17.0-SNAPSHOT, 603 paths, 968 operations, 1527
schemas all identical — so this is additive drift inside existing endpoints: 48
files, 343 insertions, 50 deletions, mostly new optional fields on request and
response models.
## Verification
Run locally, since CI never did:
- `npm run verify-api-client` — **exit 0**, so the committed client
reproduces exactly from the new spec by regeneration. This is the `API Client
Drift Check`, and the one that matters most for a generated client.
- `npm run api:surface` — 145 generated services, 648 operations, no surface
change needed.
- `tsc -p tsconfig.app.json --noEmit` clean, `lint` silent, `format:check`
clean.
Nothing in the application needed a change to compile against the new types,
which is what the additive-only delta predicted.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
