mirror of
https://github.com/microsoft/BCQuality.git
synced 2026-08-06 09:26:52 +01:00
6d1fada5a4
Two knowledge false-positive guards addressing bug 642303 (agent FPs on BCApps PR #9607): - breaking-changes: relocating a field to a tableextension in the same app under the same field ID/name is a relocation, not a deletion/rename; the field still resolves on the table, so it must not be flagged as a deleted shipped field or require ObsoleteState staging. Scoped to the contract axis; silent on data migration. - events: adding a parameter to an event publisher does not break existing subscribers (subscribers bind by name and match a subset), so the addition itself must not be reported as a breaking signature change.
18 lines
1.5 KiB
Markdown
18 lines
1.5 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
bc-version: [all]
|
|
domain: events
|
|
keywords: [event-parameters, signature, subscriber-binding, backward-compatibility, integration-event, breaking-change, false-positive]
|
|
technologies: [al]
|
|
countries: [w1]
|
|
application-area: [all]
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Adding a parameter to an event is not a breaking change
|
|
|
|
## Description
|
|
|
|
Adding a parameter to an existing event publisher does not break existing subscribers. AL binds a subscriber to a publisher by the event name, and the subscriber's parameter list only has to be a subset of the publisher's, matched by name and type. A subscriber that does not declare the new parameter keeps compiling and keeps binding — it simply ignores the addition. This holds for `IntegrationEvent` and `BusinessEvent` publishers, and even more plainly for `local` events. Appending the new parameter at the end keeps the change a clean, reviewable addition (see `add-new-event-parameters-at-the-end`). LLM reviewers often misreport the mere presence of a new event parameter as a "breaking event signature change" that breaks subscribers, which is incorrect.
|
|
|
|
## Best Practice
|
|
|
|
Do not flag the addition of a parameter to an event publisher as a breaking or signature-breaking change, and do not claim it breaks existing subscribers. Genuine, separate concerns are covered by their own rules — a parameter inserted in the middle of the list rather than appended (`add-new-event-parameters-at-the-end`), or a parameter that carries no meaningful value — and should be raised on those grounds, not framed as a backward-compatibility break.
|