Skip to content

fix(architecture-validator): clarify port dependency rule name - #290

Merged
Arc-E-Tect merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/architecture-validator-port-rule-name
Sep 22, 2026
Merged

Arc-E-Tect merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/architecture-validator-port-rule-name

Conversation

@Arc-E-Tect

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Rename the port dependency rule to accurately state its allowed dependencies.

The rule has always allowed domain-model types, types in configured inbound/outbound port packages, and configured JDK packages. This includes concrete Command, Query, and Result DTOs stored in port packages. The old identifier incorrectly implied that only domain and JDK types were valid.

Changes:

  • rename the generated ArchUnit and source-annotation rule identifiers to ports_must_only_depend_on_domain_ports_or_jdk_core
  • update the generated-source regression assertion
  • document that Command, Query, and Result DTOs are port contract types

Validation:

  • cd architecture-validator && ./gradlew clean build --no-daemon --no-build-cache --info

@Arc-E-Tect
Arc-E-Tect merged commit 26f93d0 into main Sep 22, 2026
6 checks passed
@Arc-E-Tect
Arc-E-Tect deleted the fix/architecture-validator-port-rule-name branch September 22, 2026 11:05
Arc-E-Tect added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 22, 2026
## [4.0.2](architecture-validator-v4.0.1...architecture-validator-v4.0.2) (2026-09-22)

### 🐛 Bug Fixes

* **architecture-validator:** clarify port dependency rule name ([#290](#290)) ([26f93d0](26f93d0)), closes [#290](#290)
@Arc-E-Tect

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

🎉 This PR is included in version 4.0.2 🎉

The release is available on GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

@Arc-E-Tect

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

🎉 This PR is included in version 4.8.2 🎉

The release is available on GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant