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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

fix: add provider input validation & type safety #2430

Open
wants to merge 29 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

fix: add provider input validation & type safety #2430

wants to merge 29 commits into from

Conversation

theedigerati
Copy link

@theedigerati theedigerati commented Nov 11, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Closes #1327

📑 Description

Validation for provider inputs using zod schema on the frontend and pydantic on the backend

  • zod schema for all provider inputs
  • custom validation logic for urls(with/without protocol), port, tld, file
  • built-in & custom pydantic fields types for inputs on all providers with such fields
  • type safety for provider form component
  • e2e tests

✅ Checks

  • My pull request adheres to the code style of this project
  • My code requires changes to the documentation
  • I have updated the documentation as required
  • All the tests have passed

ℹ Additional Information

https://www.loom.com/share/b08c408f192b4a29aef1d8f83c7c4638?sid=f21b2bb5-4390-4e3b-bd40-e966148597ed

@theedigerati
refactor provider form component
eb3eb4c
@theedigerati
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into provider-input-vali…
606f193 
…dation
@theedigerati
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into provider-input-vali…
a3f2e2b 
…dation
@theedigerati
add backend provider input validations
4bad410
@theedigerati
fix circular import errors
929dea1
@theedigerati
add client-side validation with zod
16f9255
@theedigerati
add backend validation for providers
c6844fc
@theedigerati
add backend validation for 7 providers
d6eaa40
@theedigerati
add backend provider validation & switch input
d28ba1a
@theedigerati
add validation for any_url - url with any scheme
83d7ed0
@theedigerati
add backend validation for 7 providers
f415058
@theedigerati
add backend validation for 7 providers
7518ad2
@theedigerati
fix form value empty string in state bug
fa72706
@theedigerati
remove http_url validation type
990ff83
@theedigerati
add validation tests for any_http_url1 and port`
6e78687
@theedigerati
add validation tests for https_url, any_url & tld
a18e2fa
@theedigerati
add provider form validation file
c7b939f
@theedigerati
add new validation logic for url
4e77c5c
@theedigerati
add validation for urls without scheme
0369bd6
@theedigerati
complete validation for 8 providers
ab9908f
@theedigerati
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into provider-input-vali…
6826e1c 
…dation
@theedigerati
add more provider tests and clean up form
ac0a246
@theedigerati
fix file type validation bug on provider config
9cdf0ef
@theedigerati
add backend provider config validation
605c188
@theedigerati
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into provider-input-vali…
5ef71eb 
…dation
@vercel Vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented Nov 11, 2024

@theedigerati is attempting to deploy a commit to the KeepHQ Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Nov 11, 2024 •
edited
Loading

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@theedigerati theedigerati marked this pull request as ready for review November 11, 2024 05:38
@dosubot dosubot bot added size:XXL This PR changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. Enhancement New feature or request labels Nov 11, 2024
@dosubot dosubot bot added the Provider Providers related issues label Nov 11, 2024
@Matvey-Kuk Matvey-Kuk self-requested a review November 11, 2024 08:13
@theedigerati
Copy link
Author

Hello @Matvey-Kuk, I'd really appreciate your review and feedback on this contribution.
Thank you.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@Matvey-Kuk Matvey-Kuk Awaiting requested review from Matvey-Kuk

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Enhancement New feature or request Provider Providers related issues size:XXL This PR changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[🔨 Enhancement]: better input validation for providers / add types for inputs
2 participants
@theedigerati @CLAassistant