Pact Foundation

Hello! Can I just double check that if a pacticipant supports both HTTP and message protocols, that you’d need to use two different pacticipant names?

Hey <@UBWHXGXSQ>,

Believe v4 Pact specification will allow for an integration (consumer/provider application pair) to share multiple interaction types via this RFC

<https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-specification/issues/79>

so it would be beneficial for client libraries to upgrade to get all the latest and greatest features. This will probably be a community effort rather than on any individual as there is quite an estate to cover, some of which isn't under the Pact foundations direct control.

I've got it on my radar for next year's plan of attack :slightly_smiling_face:

We could do with some documentation on the site regarding those caveats

probably

• message pact testing section
    ◦ <https://docs.pact.io/getting_started/how_pact_works#non-http-testing-message-pact>
• pact specification section
    ◦ <https://docs.pact.io/implementation_guides/pact_specification#migration-guides>

Other than that there are just a few pointers to the naming convention required is a few GH issues in diff repos.