feat: check station_information and station_status for corresponding station ids #189
Merged
davidgamez merged 3 commits intoMobilityData:masterfrom Feb 2, 2026
Merged
Conversation
|
|
testower
approved these changes
Jan 30, 2026
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks for reviewing. I added validation for v.2.1. From my side, this PR is now ready to merge. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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 adds a "foreign key" reference check for
station_information' andstation_status'station_ids.Besides the addition of rule
NoInvalidReferenceToStationit fixes test fixtures which had inconsistentstation_ids in theirstation_informationandstation_statusfeeds.Motivation
The GBFS spec for versions greater or equal to v2.1 says:
Note: This PR includes this check for v2.2, v.2.3 and v3.0. If you agree with the implementation, I'd add it for v2.1 as well. v2.0 had this requirement not yet clearly spelled out, so I'd not add the validation for <=2.0.