Closed fivetran-joemarkiewicz closed 4 months ago
My remaining question is that in other packages, we preferred to cast in the source package rather than in the downstream joins, so we only had to cast once. Do we not do this in this case because the intermediate models get a bit complicated and this was more straightforward or another reason?
Great question @fivetran-catfritz! You are correct that I would prefer we typically cast the fields as string in the staging models. However, I did not take the approach here as it was a more straightforward approach and when exploring casting the upstream fields as strings I found that this PR would have quite a larger fingerprint and cause significantly more breaking changes (with little to no value). Because of this I decided taking the direct approach was the more efficient way to go about addressing this issue for both us and the end user. In this case the end user only has to be concerned about the revised_parent_issue_id
being changed to a string datatype. If we were to cast the fields (particularly the issue_id
field) upstream it would involve more models and fields that would be breaking.
Let me know if you have any other questions!
PR Overview
This PR will address the following Issue/Feature: Issue #121
This PR will result in the following new package version:
v0.16.0
The changing datatype of the
revised_parent_issue_id
field from int to string will result in a breaking change. There is no impact on incremental models, so no full refresh is required. But we should categorize this as a breaking change.Please provide the finalized CHANGELOG entry which details the relevant changes included in this PR:
🚨 Breaking Changes: Bug Fixes 🚨
revised_parent_issue_id
field within theint_jira__issue_type_parents
modelparent_issue_id
field within thejira__issue_enhanced
modelUnder the Hood
field
andissue_field_history
seed files to ensure we have an updated test case to capture the epic-link scenario for classic Jira environments.PR Checklist
Basic Validation
Please acknowledge that you have successfully performed the following commands locally:
Before marking this PR as "ready for review" the following have been applied:
Detailed Validation
Please share any and all of your validation steps:
Please see the corresponding Height ticket for a link to the Hex validation doc.
If you had to summarize this PR in an emoji, which would it be?
🧶