Merged
Conversation
2405653 to
3660ed8
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #144 +/- ##
=====================================
Coverage 100% 100%
=====================================
Files 12 12
Lines 1728 1729 +1
=====================================
+ Hits 1728 1729 +1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
wilhuff
approved these changes
Feb 26, 2018
| validate.isDocumentReference('documentRef', documentRef); | ||
| validate.isDocument('data', data, { | ||
| allowEmpty: !merge, | ||
| allowEmpty: true, |
This comment was marked as spam.
This comment was marked as spam.
Sorry, something went wrong.
This comment was marked as spam.
This comment was marked as spam.
Sorry, something went wrong.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR allows the call
set({}, merge:true)since it can be used to ensure that a document exist on the server.This came up as a valid use case in an internal discussion (b/73495873 - based on customer feedback in b/73132705).
There is currently a conformance test that rejects this call. I excluded the test and will work with @jba on an update.