Skip to content

fix(api): allow missing custom hostname validation records#5543

Merged
jgoux merged 2 commits into
developfrom
fix/custom-hostname-validation-records
Jun 11, 2026
Merged

fix(api): allow missing custom hostname validation records#5543
jgoux merged 2 commits into
developfrom
fix/custom-hostname-validation-records

Conversation

@jgoux

@jgoux jgoux commented Jun 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Updates the temporary Management API OpenAPI overrides so custom-hostname SSL validation records are optional while the backend response is inconsistent with the published schema.

The generated API contract now accepts responses where data.result.ssl.validation_records is absent. The legacy domains formatter treats the absent field like the Go CLI nil-slice behavior when rendering human-readable status output.

This prevents domain commands from failing at schema decode time when staging returns a custom-hostname response without outstanding SSL validation records.

@jgoux jgoux marked this pull request as ready for review June 11, 2026 08:13
@jgoux jgoux requested a review from a team as a code owner June 11, 2026 08:13
@jgoux jgoux enabled auto-merge June 11, 2026 08:13

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 32126a44a2

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread packages/api/src/generated/contracts.ts

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 32126a44a2

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread packages/api/src/generated/contracts.ts
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Supabase CLI preview

npx --yes https://pkg.pr.new/supabase@5543

Preview package for commit b535e37.

@jgoux jgoux disabled auto-merge June 11, 2026 08:21
@jgoux jgoux enabled auto-merge June 11, 2026 08:27
@jgoux jgoux added this pull request to the merge queue Jun 11, 2026
Merged via the queue into develop with commit 09a5a92 Jun 11, 2026
33 checks passed
@jgoux jgoux deleted the fix/custom-hostname-validation-records branch June 11, 2026 08:38
mxcl pushed a commit to automic-vault/supabase-cli that referenced this pull request Jun 11, 2026
…5543)

Updates the temporary Management API OpenAPI overrides so
custom-hostname SSL validation records are optional while the backend
response is inconsistent with the published schema.

The generated API contract now accepts responses where
`data.result.ssl.validation_records` is absent. The legacy domains
formatter treats the absent field like the Go CLI nil-slice behavior
when rendering human-readable status output.

This prevents domain commands from failing at schema decode time when
staging returns a custom-hostname response without outstanding SSL
validation records.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants