Matt Fellows
Matt Fellows
I imagine it's a pretty straightforward addition - would you be open to creating a PR?
> There are no plans to do this at present, no. I'm not sure how the JS one works because the Pact Spec doesn't say anything about XML support either....
You need to supply a valid PactFlow token (hence the `401`). The role associated with the token probably doesn't have one of the `contract:data:` permissions. See https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/permissions/#contract_datamanage. See also https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/authorization-help#getting-a-401-unauthorized-when-publishing-or-verifying-pacts....
I see. The publishing of the verification is unsuccessful, but the tests passed. The overall result should be a non-zero exit status (which presumably is happening). How would you expect...
@uglyog what do you think?
> This is not a trivial change. The result is the result of the verification. The verifier does not propagate the status of whether it was able to successfully upload...
No, the issue is upstream here: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-reference/issues/171. If you are willing to help we'd appreciate it.
Following up on this, it seems to always return a `200` so long as the consumer/provider pair exists, no matter what branch you give it. In fact, as long as...
It currently doesn't but I'd support a PR that allowed an environment variable to specify the path. Come to think of it, you could also just set `PATH` in your...
No worries, thanks!