Rename car to carshare to match top-level spec description #411
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
|
|
|
I don't know that this spec-level change is needed, especially as it would be breaking. The vehicle is a |
|
Sounds good to me! I'll nuke the PR. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Explain pull request
In this commit f720a09 the top-level name of
carwas switched tocarshare. However, I noticed that change did not seem to bubble down to the agency and provider spec level. This changes thevehicle_typesenum to havecarshareinstead ofcar. This would be a breaking change, however I find the discontinuity between the types in the top level compared to agency and provider to be pretty strange... If this isn't intended to be a rename that goes down to the data-type level, feel free to close the PR!Is this a breaking change
A breaking change would require consumers or implementors of the API to modify their code for it to continue to function (ex: renaming of a required field or the change in data type of an existing field). A non-breaking change would allow existing code to continue to function (ex: addition of an optional field or the creation of a new optional endpoint).
Impacted Spec
Which spec(s) will this pull request impact?
agencypolicyproviderAdditional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.