Skip to content

Fix/curation set types #335

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
zaffron wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Fix/curation set types #335

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
ad1d582
fix(collections): add curation_sets to CollectionUpdateSchema
zaffron Mar 12, 2026
aa1bf50
fix(curation): use dedicated upsert schema for CurationSetItem
zaffron Mar 12, 2026
12e408f
fix(collections): remove redundant properties from CollectionUpdateSc…
zaffron Mar 13, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions src/Typesense/Collection.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ export interface CollectionUpdateSchema
extends Partial<Omit<CollectionCreateSchema, "name" | "fields">> {
fields?: (CollectionFieldSchema | CollectionDropFieldSchema)[];
synonym_sets?: string[];
curation_sets?: string[];
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@tharropoulos tharropoulos Mar 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

CollectionUpdateSchema already picks this up transitively via Partial<Omit<CollectionCreateSchema, "name" | "fields">>, because CollectionCreateSchema is based on BaseCollectionCreateSchema, which already includes curation_sets. So adding curation_sets directly on CollectionUpdateSchema is redundant.

TypeScript interface declaration merging means redeclaring the same property here won’t necessarily break anything, but it still doesn’t add new type information and makes the schema definition harder to reason about.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@zaffron zaffron Mar 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think I should have double checked the types. Looking back synonym_sets also seems redundant here.
Should I remove that as well from the extended type or leave it for now and just remove the update I have done?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@tharropoulos tharropoulos Mar 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If you could remove it, I would appreciate it. It doesn't hurt being here, but removing it cleans redundant declarations!

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@zaffron zaffron Mar 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Got it, I have removed the redundant types and pushed the changes

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@zaffron zaffron Mar 16, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@tharropoulos LMK if you need any more changes to be done on the PR or if it's okay to be merged

}

export interface CollectionDeleteOptions {
Expand Down