Skip to content

Release v1.6.62 - #255

Open
roncodes wants to merge 3 commits into
mainfrom
release/v1.6.62
Open

Release v1.6.62#255
roncodes wants to merge 3 commits into
mainfrom
release/v1.6.62

Conversation

@roncodes

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Release branch for v1.6.62, cut from main for the custom-field public id.

What it carries

Give custom fields a public id (#254) — every other resource in the platform is addressed by a prefixed public id; a custom field was addressed by its uuid, so any API handing one out exposed an internal identifier. FleetOps' inspection API was the case in point: a submission names the field each answer belongs to, and had nothing but a uuid to name it with.

  • CustomField takes HasPublicId with $publicIdType = 'custom_field', and public_id joins $fillable.
  • A migration adds the column and backfills existing rows. It is nullable()->index() rather than unique-and-required, following the groups precedent, so it is safe on an already-populated table.
  • HasCustomFields::setCustomField() creates a field with saveQuietly(), which skips the creating hook that mints the id, so that path mints its own — otherwise a field created on the fly would be the only one without one.

Scope

CustomField is platform-wide, so this gives every custom field a public id — orders, vendors, drivers, not only inspections. withCustomFields()'s public projection emits field names and is unchanged.

Downstream

FleetOps #319 emits the public id on a form's fields and on a submission's answers, falling back to the uuid until this lands — so nothing breaks in the interim, and the ids simply start appearing once it does. The collection (fleetbase/postman#62, #63) and the PHP SDK (fleetbase/fleetbase-php#17) already document the public-id form.

Checks

#254 was green before merge: build, Postman contract, and both codecov gates. vendor/bin/pest ran 1434 tests with 0 failures, php-cs-fixer clean, and a new generates custom field public ids test covers the minting.

Every other resource in the platform is addressed by a prefixed public
id; a custom field was addressed by its uuid, so any API handing one out
exposed an internal identifier. FleetOps' inspection API is the case in
point — a submission names the field each answer belongs to, and had
nothing but a uuid to name it with.

Existing rows are backfilled, and the column is nullable and indexed
rather than unique-and-required so the migration is safe on a table that
is already populated. A field created on the fly through
setCustomField() is saved quietly, which skips the hook that mints the
id, so that path mints its own.
The release branch carried the feature and nothing else: composer.json
still read 1.6.61 and RELEASE.md still described v1.6.61's IAM
authorization work. release.yml refuses the tag unless both agree with
the branch name, and its RELEASE.md check exists precisely to catch the
previous release's notes left in place — which is what these were.

composer.json is this repository's single source of the version, and
RELEASE.md now opens with the version it describes.
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Sep 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (4c763ce) to head (546d962).

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##                main      #255   +/-   ##
===========================================
  Coverage     100.00%   100.00%           
  Complexity      6750      6750           
===========================================
  Files            398       398           
  Lines          22502     22505    +3     
===========================================
+ Hits           22502     22505    +3     
Flag Coverage Δ
backend 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant