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

feat: pydantic models #35

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

feat: pydantic models #35

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

ahnsv
Copy link

@ahnsv ahnsv commented Sep 17, 2023

Resolve #10

Hi,
The test code gets messy to make the models (attr, pydantic) compatible.
If it feels right, I want to merge them first, refactor them and apply more validation criteria on model fields in later PRs.

@alexanderjordanbaker
Copy link
Collaborator

@ahnsv A few high level questions:

  • Is your goal to have support for attr and pydantic both going forwards?
  • Is the V1 vs V2 model approach meant to be temporary or permanent?

@ahnsv
Copy link
Author

ahnsv commented Sep 22, 2023

@alexanderjordanbaker
I think it would be better if we can replace it. In this PR, I added v2 for compatibility.
Do you think that I should make it replace it in this PR?

@woosal1337 woosal1337 mentioned this pull request May 19, 2024
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@187ram 187ram 187ram approved these changes

@yazhuo-wyze yazhuo-wyze yazhuo-wyze approved these changes

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

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Suggestion] use dataclass or pydantic instead of attr for models.
5 participants
@ahnsv @alexanderjordanbaker @187ram @yazhuo-wyze @socar-humphrey