Skip to content

Test-Json: Use JsonSchema.Net (System.Text.Json) instead of NJsonSchema (Newtonsoft.Json)#18141

Merged
iSazonov merged 59 commits intoPowerShell:masterfrom
gregsdennis:update-test-json-to-use-jsonschema.net
May 4, 2023
Merged

Test-Json: Use JsonSchema.Net (System.Text.Json) instead of NJsonSchema (Newtonsoft.Json)#18141
iSazonov merged 59 commits intoPowerShell:masterfrom
gregsdennis:update-test-json-to-use-jsonschema.net

Conversation

@gregsdennis
Copy link
Contributor

@gregsdennis gregsdennis commented Sep 21, 2022 •
edited
Loading

PR Summary

Updates the Test-Json cmdlet to use JsonSchema.Net instead of NJsonSchema in order to:

  • use System.Text.Json instead of Newtonsoft
  • support the latest JSON Schema drafts (up to 2020-12)

(continuation of #18023 - see here for additional comments)

PR Context

Resolves #18009

NJsonSchema only supports up to draft 7, which at this point is several years old and two versions behind. Additionally, it relies on Newtonsoft.Json.

This change is a merely drop-in replacement of the implementation that provides validation.

The cmdlet API doesn't change, however the cmdlet will no longer support draft 4 schemas. Draft 4 is a decade old at this point and the JSON Schema team (myself included) is encouraging tooling to only support draft 6/7 (6 is a subset of 7) and later. (In the future, support for these should be dropped as newer versions are released.) I'm not sure if this is considered a breaking change for this repo.

To assist users in their migration away from draft 4, the alterschema draft migration tool has been created.

I expect the existing test coverage is adequate to cover this change.

PR Checklist

@ghost ghost assigned iSazonov Sep 21, 2022
@gregsdennis gregsdennis changed the title Update test json to use jsonschema.net Update test json to use JsonSchema.Net (System.Text.Json) instead of NJsonSchema (Newtonsoft.Json) Sep 21, 2022
@gregsdennis gregsdennis changed the title Update test json to use JsonSchema.Net (System.Text.Json) instead of NJsonSchema (Newtonsoft.Json) Update Test-Json to use JsonSchema.Net (System.Text.Json) instead of NJsonSchema (Newtonsoft.Json) Sep 21, 2022
@gregsdennis gregsdennis changed the title Update Test-Json to use JsonSchema.Net (System.Text.Json) instead of NJsonSchema (Newtonsoft.Json) Test-Json: Use JsonSchema.Net (System.Text.Json) instead of NJsonSchema (Newtonsoft.Json) Sep 21, 2022
@iSazonov iSazonov added CL-BreakingChange Indicates that a PR should be marked as a breaking change in the Change Log CL-General Indicates that a PR should be marked as a general cmdlet change in the Change Log labels Sep 21, 2022
@iSazonov iSazonov mentioned this pull request Sep 27, 2022
Closed
14 tasks
SteveL-MSFT
SteveL-MSFT requested changes Oct 3, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@SteveL-MSFT SteveL-MSFT left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One change requested to put error string in resx otherwise LGTM

@ghost ghost added Waiting on Author The PR was reviewed and requires changes or comments from the author before being accept and removed Waiting on Author The PR was reviewed and requires changes or comments from the author before being accept labels Oct 3, 2022
@gregsdennis gregsdennis force-pushed the update-test-json-to-use-jsonschema.net branch from 6aba9c3 to df01974 Compare October 5, 2022 20:22
@gregsdennis
Copy link
Contributor Author

gregsdennis commented Oct 6, 2022

I'm not sure what the issue is with the various builds. I can't run the macos one, and I've never been able to get the files.wxs file regenerated right (it breaks every time I have to rebase).

As an aside, why is this file even included in the repo if it's generated at build time anyway?

@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

iSazonov commented Oct 7, 2022

@gregsdennis I can not reproduce the issue locally and I hope anybody from MSFT team will help to resolve the CI issue.

@ghost ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Oct 14, 2022
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Oct 14, 2022

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

@gregsdennis
Copy link
Contributor Author

gregsdennis commented Oct 14, 2022

@SteveL-MSFT I could use some help getting the wxs file fixed. It has never generated right for me. This happens every time I have to rebase.

@gregsdennis
Copy link
Contributor Author

gregsdennis commented Nov 7, 2022

@SteveL-MSFT I cannot keep updating this branch because I can't generate the .wxs file. Please assist.

I'm not sure why this PR has languished this long. It seems like a straightforward change.

@gregsdennis
Copy link
Contributor Author

gregsdennis commented Jan 5, 2023

Can anyone help with this? Is there any reason why it hasn't been pulled in?

@iSazonov iSazonov mentioned this pull request Jan 9, 2023
Closed
@gregsdennis
Copy link
Contributor Author

gregsdennis commented Jan 18, 2023

@SteveL-MSFT tagging again for an update.

@SteveL-MSFT
Copy link
Member

SteveL-MSFT commented Feb 6, 2023 •
edited
Loading

@gregsdennis sorry for the delay, I'm re-reviewing it today

@ghost ghost removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Feb 6, 2023
@ghost ghost removed the Waiting on Author The PR was reviewed and requires changes or comments from the author before being accept label May 2, 2023
daxian-dbw
daxian-dbw approved these changes May 2, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. @gregsdennis Thanks for your contribution, and I really appreciate your patience!

@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

iSazonov commented May 2, 2023

@gregsdennis Please look test fails.

@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated
Copy link

pull-request-quantifier-deprecated bot commented May 2, 2023

This PR has 212 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

Quantification details 

Label      : Large
Size       : +119 -93
Percentile : 61.2%

Total files changed: 8

Change summary by file extension:
.csproj : +1 -5
.cs : +56 -31
.resx : +5 -2
.ps1 : +47 -49
.json : +10 -6

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@iSazonov iSazonov requested review from SteveL-MSFT and daxian-dbw May 3, 2023 07:52
@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

iSazonov commented May 3, 2023

@SteveL-MSFT @daxian-dbw Please update your review (large rebase was).

daxian-dbw
daxian-dbw approved these changes May 3, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

New changes after my last review looks good to me.

@iSazonov iSazonov merged commit 1b248ef into PowerShell:master May 4, 2023
@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

iSazonov commented May 4, 2023

@gregsdennis Thanks for your contribution!

@gregsdennis gregsdennis mentioned this pull request May 4, 2023
Merged
22 tasks
@sdwheeler sdwheeler added the PowerShell-Docs needed The PR was reviewed and a PowerShell Docs update is needed label Jun 1, 2023
@sdwheeler sdwheeler mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Closed
2 tasks
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jun 29, 2023

🎉v7.4.0-preview.4 has been released which incorporates this pull request.:tada:

Handy links:

@ghost ghost mentioned this pull request Jun 29, 2023
Closed
@KalleOlaviNiemitalo KalleOlaviNiemitalo mentioned this pull request Oct 27, 2023
Closed
@pim-simons pim-simons mentioned this pull request Nov 20, 2023
Closed
@jborean93 jborean93 mentioned this pull request Nov 22, 2023
Open
5 tasks
@kyle-ntx kyle-ntx mentioned this pull request Nov 27, 2023
Closed
5 tasks
@easitab-owner easitab-owner mentioned this pull request Feb 20, 2024
Closed
This was referenced Mar 13, 2024
Closed
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw daxian-dbw approved these changes

@iSazonov iSazonov iSazonov approved these changes

@TravisEz13 TravisEz13 Awaiting requested review from TravisEz13

@adityapatwardhan adityapatwardhan Awaiting requested review from adityapatwardhan

@anmenaga anmenaga Awaiting requested review from anmenaga

@PaulHigin PaulHigin Awaiting requested review from PaulHigin

@SteveL-MSFT SteveL-MSFT Awaiting requested review from SteveL-MSFT

Assignees

@iSazonov iSazonov

Labels

CL-BreakingChange Indicates that a PR should be marked as a breaking change in the Change Log CL-General Indicates that a PR should be marked as a general cmdlet change in the Change Log Large PowerShell-Docs needed The PR was reviewed and a PowerShell Docs update is needed

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Supporting later versions of JSON Schema

6 participants

@gregsdennis @iSazonov @SteveL-MSFT @daxian-dbw @sdwheeler @TravisEz13

Comments