Skip to content

Operator API | Change No Show Blocks to Service Violation Blocks#745

Open
anm-ioki wants to merge 3 commits into
mainfrom
service-violation-blocks
Open

Operator API | Change No Show Blocks to Service Violation Blocks#745
anm-ioki wants to merge 3 commits into
mainfrom
service-violation-blocks

Conversation

@anm-ioki

@anm-ioki anm-ioki commented Jul 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

The Operator API now has new endpoints for service violation blocks to replace the existing no show blocks. These changes use the new endpoints and rename the models accordingly.

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

This PR updates the Operator API client to use the new service violation block endpoints and models in place of the former no show block ones, aligning the gem’s Operator API surface with the backend API rename.

Changes:

  • Renames the Operator model from NoShowBlock to ServiceViolationBlock.
  • Updates Operator API endpoint definitions to use service_violation_block(s) paths and method names (including acknowledge).
  • Updates Operator API specs to assert the new URLs and returned model class.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File Description
spec/ioki/operator_api_spec.rb Updates request URL and return-type expectations for the renamed service violation block endpoints.
lib/ioki/model/operator/service_violation_block.rb Renames the Operator model class to ServiceViolationBlock.
lib/ioki/apis/operator_api.rb Replaces no-show-block endpoint wiring with service-violation-block endpoints and model bindings.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

@anm-ioki anm-ioki marked this pull request as ready for review July 6, 2026 13:58
@anm-ioki anm-ioki requested a review from dal-ioki July 6, 2026 14:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants