[shivamgoel]

SUMMARY

docs/static/resources/openapi.json is generated from the running app but committed by hand, so it drifts silently. The last genuine regeneration before #43788 was #33378, sixteen months earlier. This regenerates the spec on every PR and fails on a dirty diff.

Two generation inputs are pinned deliberately, because getting either wrong was a real failure while preparing #43788. The job installs requirements/base.txt: apispec 6.10.0 renders marshmallow 4's unknown=RAISE as "additionalProperties": false where the pinned 6.6.1 does not, so an unpinned guard would fail every PR. And it passes no config file, so generation reflects the routes a default deployment registers — a config with feature flags enabled documents paths that 404 for everyone who hasn't enabled them.

No paths: filter, matching enforce-single-migration-head: a required check that never runs on a PR blocks it forever. The job is ~10s.

TESTING INSTRUCTIONS

Passes on unmodified master — the committed spec reproduces byte-identically on the pinned requirements. To see it fail, add a field to any marshmallow schema without regenerating:

SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY_DATABASE_URI='sqlite:///:memory:' \
  FLASK_APP='superset.app:create_app()' superset update-api-docs
git diff --stat -- docs/static/resources/openapi.json

Adding one schema renumbers apispec's auto-generated suffixes (User1, Subject1), so diffs are routinely larger than the change.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

• Has associated issue:
• Required feature flags:
• Changes UI
• Includes DB Migration (follow approval process in SIP-59)
• Introduces new feature or API
• Removes existing feature or API

[bito-code-review]

Bito Automatic Review Skipped - Files Excluded

Bito didn't auto-review this change because all changed files are in the exclusion list for automatic reviews. No action is needed if you didn't intend for the agent to review it. Otherwise, to manually trigger a review, type /review in a comment and save.
You can change the excluded files settings here, or contact your Bito workspace admin at evan@preset.io.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for superset-docs-preview ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	9cd960a
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/superset-docs-preview/deploys/6a9afbf3be13e600085d8756
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-43841--superset-docs-preview.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.
🤖 Make changes	Run an agent on this branch

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[sadpandajoe]

This new required check is already failing because regenerating the spec changes openapi.json (110 additions, 46 deletions), so the PR cannot merge as written. Should the regenerated artifact be included with this guard?

[shivamgoel]

done

[bito-code-review]

Yes, the regenerated artifact should be included in the PR. The current workflow is designed to enforce that the checked-in openapi.json matches the output generated by the project's pinned dependencies and configuration. If the spec changes during the check, it indicates that the committed file is stale or was generated in an environment that does not match the project's requirements. To resolve the failure, you should regenerate the spec locally using the exact environment specified in the workflow steps and commit the updated openapi.json to the PR.

.github/workflows/check-openapi-spec-drift.yml

- name: Assert the published spec is up to date
        run: |
          if ! git diff --quiet -- docs/static/resources/openapi.json; then
            echo "::error::docs/static/resources/openapi.json is stale."
            echo "Regenerate it on the pinned requirements, with no config file:"
            echo "  SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY_DATABASE_URI='sqlite:///:memory:' \"
            echo "    FLASK_APP='superset.app:create_app()' superset update-api-docs"
            git diff --stat -- docs/static/resources/openapi.json
            exit 1
          fi

[sadpandajoe]

If a registration regression leaves the app with no v1 BaseApi, superset update-api-docs only prints API version not found and exits successfully without rewriting the file. The subsequent diff check then passes against the old committed spec, so this guard misses precisely that broken-generation state. Could this step fail when no spec was generated (or assert that the output was produced) before checking the diff?

[shivamgoel]

Good catch — fixed in the update-api-docs CLI rather than the workflow, so every caller fails not just this guard.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 16.66667% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 79.46%. Comparing base (d9b201d) to head (9cd960a).
⚠️ Report is 10 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
superset/cli/update.py	16.66%	4 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #43841   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   79.46%   79.46%           
=======================================
  Files        2895     2895           
  Lines      168167   168167           
  Branches    38995    38995           
=======================================
+ Hits       133627   133630    +3     
+ Misses      32041    32036    -5     
- Partials     2499     2501    +2     

Flag	Coverage Δ
hive	37.77% <0.00%> (ø)
mysql	57.48% <0.00%> (ø)
postgres	57.52% <0.00%> (ø)
presto	39.66% <0.00%> (ø)
python	83.88% <16.66%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
sqlite	57.21% <0.00%> (ø)
unit	74.45% <16.66%> (+0.05%)	⬆️

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.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[villebro]

LGTM, this is awesome! Waiting for CI to finish

[bito-code-review]

Bito Automatic Review Skipped – PR Already Merged

Bito scheduled an automatic review for this pull request, but the review was skipped because this PR was merged before the review could be run.
No action is needed if you didn't intend to review it. To get a review, you can type /review in a comment and save it