fix: check each type independently #2290
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Because type creation resides in the do block it is all or nothing. When it's not a duplicate object that behavior is appropriate, but if it's because one of the types already exists then you will fail the creation of the other types. For example: * `aal_level` type already exists * `factor_status` & `factor_type` are missing Currently this would prevent `factor_status` & `factor_type` from ever getting created.
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 20116748949Details
💛 - Coveralls |
fadymak
reviewed
Dec 11, 2025
fadymak
approved these changes
Dec 11, 2025
cemalkilic
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 12, 2026
Resets the main branch (`master`) to have the same changeset as 2.184.0 but under 2.185.0. Original release please notes: ### Features * Add Sb-Forwarded-For header and IP-based rate limiting ([#2295](#2295)) ([e8f679b](e8f679b)) * allow amr claim to be array of strings or objects ([#2274](#2274)) ([607da43](607da43)) * Treat rate limit header value as comma-separated list ([#2282](#2282)) ([5f2e279](5f2e279)) ### Bug Fixes * check each type independently ([#2290](#2290)) ([d9de0af](d9de0af)) * fix the wrong error return value ([#1950](#1950)) ([e2dfb5d](e2dfb5d)) * **indexworker:** remove pg_trgm extension ([#2301](#2301)) ([c553b10](c553b10)) * **oauth-server:** allow custom URI schemes in client redirect URIs ([#2298](#2298)) ([ea72f57](ea72f57)) * tighten email validation rules ([#2304](#2304)) ([33bb372](33bb372)) --------- Co-authored-by: depthfirst-app[bot] <184448029+depthfirst-app[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
cemalkilic
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 12, 2026
🤖 I have created a release *beep* *boop* --- ## [2.185.0](v2.184.0...v2.185.0) (2026-01-12) ### Features * Add Sb-Forwarded-For header and IP-based rate limiting ([#2295](#2295)) ([e8f679b](e8f679b)) * allow amr claim to be array of strings or objects ([#2274](#2274)) ([607da43](607da43)) * reset main branch to 2.185.0 ([#2325](#2325)) ([b9d0500](b9d0500)) * Treat rate limit header value as comma-separated list ([#2282](#2282)) ([5f2e279](5f2e279)) ### Bug Fixes * additional provider and issuer checks ([#2326](#2326)) ([cb79a74](cb79a74)) * check each type independently ([#2290](#2290)) ([d9de0af](d9de0af)) * fix the wrong error return value ([#1950](#1950)) ([e2dfb5d](e2dfb5d)) * **indexworker:** remove pg_trgm extension ([#2301](#2301)) ([c553b10](c553b10)) * **oauth-server:** allow custom URI schemes in client redirect URIs ([#2298](#2298)) ([ea72f57](ea72f57)) * tighten email validation rules ([#2304](#2304)) ([33bb372](33bb372)) --- This PR was generated with [Release Please](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please). See [documentation](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please#release-please). Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
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.
Because type creation resides in the do block it is all or nothing. When it's not a duplicate object that behavior is appropriate, but if it's because one of the types already exists then you will fail the creation of the other types.
For example:
aal_leveltype already existsfactor_status&factor_typeare missingCurrently this would prevent
factor_status&factor_typefrom ever getting created.