Closed bigludo7 closed 1 year ago
hahaha, yes Ludovic.
Let's wait until the conclusion of that track, because as an integer, "pattern" concept does not apply but the use of: minimum: maximum: probably would be the suitable one. Think this is gonna be moved in Commonalities
Let's keep this Issue Open. Think can take still some time to have an alignment. Just to have track of it when considering this in a higher version
Open thread in Commonalities: https://github.com/camaraproject/WorkingGroups/issues/151
Currently being addressed in https://github.com/camaraproject/WorkingGroups/pull/162
Model is the one fllowed within WG, just will take out pattern from "status" as pattern applies for string fields
Set to closed as covered in PRs: https://github.com/camaraproject/CarrierBillingCheckOut/pull/60 and https://github.com/camaraproject/CarrierBillingCheckOut/pull/64
Hi We need to change again :)
See https://github.com/camaraproject/WorkingGroups/issues/143
No hurry there for next API update we should align.