Hi! Is there a changelog on Pactflow releases? My ...
# pactflow
t
Hi! Is there a changelog on Pactflow releases? My team started getting some errors on cross verification results for bidirectional contracts, but all worked last week. I’m looking for the clues 🙏
m
Hi Tatiana, we don’t publish a changelog for all of the changes we make (lots), but usually for the big ones. We have made changes to BDCT recently, including some bug fixes. This is likely the one that is causing issues: https://github.com/pactflow/swagger-mock-validator/pull/25
We believe it should be catching some false positives
Are you able to share some more info on the issues you are having?
t
Thanks for your reply! Yeah, we started getting such errors on all our covered endpoints:
Copy code
Response Body Contains Unknown Information
No schema found for response body

Mismatched Pact Path:
[root].interactions[0].response.body


Mismatched Provider Path:
[root].paths./api/v1/variables.get.responses.200
It feels like the validator stoped recognising out schemas or something. Let me have a look at the link you’ve shared
👍 1
v
Hey, I made those changes. There should be better content-negotiation now, and it should try to apply the correct schema. When we launched it, we expected that some number of users were incorrectly passing before, and should be correctly failing with this change. But, it's possible that there are bugs too! Keep us posted!
m
looking at the above:
Copy code
No schema found for response body
I suspect you were a subset of our customers who did not have the correct content types set, and as such, were getting a false sense of security. The previous behaviour was to skip such checks, which is antithetical to the objective here
👍 1
t
I see! yeah, we wrote OAS spec “manually” and relied on spectral validation to force us to specify all the fields, but apparently it didn’t.
👍 2
m
Interesting, thanks for letting us know
and sorry for the hassle
Let us know how you go, and if you need any assistance in getting that lined up, happy to help
t
UPD: It wasn’t an issue with OAS, it was that we sent the incorrect request
accept
header
"accept": "application/json, text/plain, */*"
in the consumer contract. Changing it to
"accept": "application/json"
helped. Thanks for your help!
🙌 1
v
thinking we didn't account for multiple
accept
. I'll add that to our backlog
👍 2
m
Thanks Tatiana
That’s good to hear. It makes sense - if you say you can accept multiple content types, but there is only a schema for one of them, we could probably make the assumption that you can handle the one that’s in the OAS. But if there is a match for multiple, we’ll need to deal with that.
👍 1