-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 241
fix(client): node compatible mergeHeaders
#2585
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.
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
fix(client): node compatible mergeHeaders
#2585
Conversation
|
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 391ced3 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
@volesen is attempting to deploy a commit to the Hey API Team on Vercel. A member of the Team first needs to authorize it. |
commit: |
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2585 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 24.16% 24.19% +0.03%
==========================================
Files 363 363
Lines 36629 36654 +25
Branches 1644 1650 +6
==========================================
+ Hits 8850 8869 +19
- Misses 27766 27772 +6
Partials 13 13
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hey @volesen can you add the same logic to the other clients so they maintain feature parity? And what's the alternative approach you mention?
3f455a6
to
b27f069
Compare
@mrlubos, I just updated all instances using |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks great, thank you!
Closes #2230
Closes #2521
Related #2539
Alternatively, I think the cleanest approach would be to handle
Header
instances separately, as they always containstring
as values.