- [YES/NO] I have added an explanation of what changes in this merge do and why we should include it?: YES
- [YES/NO] I have updated the documentation accordingly.: YES
- [YES/NO/NA] I have added tests to cover my changes.: YES
- [YES/NO/NA] All new and existing tests passed.: YES
- [YES/NO/NA] My code follows the code style of this project.: YES
- [YES/NO/NA] I ran lint checks locally prior to submission.: NA
What is the issue or story related to the change?
High level design:
Adding a new field called
flattenedSchemaInfo object. This will hold the compact schema (i.e. without expanding references). This field would be used for getting latest minor version, which in turn would be used for checking against any breaking changes in schema withing a major version. Please refer the issue linked to read more details.
Issue: #15 (closed)
- Added new field in
- This new field would hold the actual compact schema passed by user
- This compact schema will now be used for checking against breaking changes
- Removed the
AzureSchemaStoreobject, which previously was being used for fetching schema
- Updated UTs
Ran Integration test for this scenario locally.
Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO] NO
- Please provide an ETA when you plan to review this MR. Write a comment to decline or provide an ETA.
- Block the MR if you feel there is less testing or no details in the MR
- Please cover the following aspects in the MR -- Coding design: <Reviewer1> -- Backward Compatibility: <Reviewer2> -- Feature Logic: <Logic design> -- <Any other context mention here> OR -- <Component 1>: <Reviewer1> -- <CosmosDB>: <Reviewer2> -- <ServiceBus> <Reviewer3> -- <Mention any other component and owner>