fix(openapi): add missing ad-hoc webhook fields to WebhookRepresentation#2640
Merged
Conversation
vdusek
added
adhoc
Contributor
|
🗑️ Preview for this PR was deleted. |
Contributor
|
Important Action required — @vdusek please coordinate this docs PR with the Python API client PR linked below. Because this PR modifies the OpenAPI specification, the generated models in A companion PR has been opened in
|
fnesveda
approved these changes
Jun 15, 2026
Contributor
|
Important Action required — @vdusek please coordinate this docs PR with the Python API client PR linked below. Because this PR modifies the OpenAPI specification, the generated models in The companion
|
vdusek
added a commit
to apify/apify-client-python
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 16, 2026
This PR updates the auto-generated Pydantic models and TypedDicts based on OpenAPI specification changes in [apify-docs PR #2640](apify/apify-docs#2640). On top of the regenerated models, it fixes a related bug: ad-hoc webhooks passed to `start()` / `call()` silently dropped `idempotency_key`, `ignore_ssl_errors` and `do_not_retry`. `WebhookRepresentation` declared only the four templating fields, and `encode_webhooks_to_base64` keeps only declared fields, so these three never reached the platform. The platform accepts and honors all three for ad-hoc webhooks (verified in apify-core: the run-start handler feeds them into the same webhook-creation path as the create-webhook endpoint, including the `idempotencyKey` dedup). What changed: - The regenerated models add the three fields to `WebhookRepresentation` and both webhook-representation typed dicts (snake_case + camelCase). - Reworks the `WebhookCreate` / dict projection in `encode_webhooks_to_base64` to filter by the fields `WebhookRepresentation` declares, instead of hand-listing them. New ad-hoc fields now flow through automatically, so this class of silent-drop bug cannot recur. Unblocks apify/apify-sdk-python#963, which forwards these fields from the SDK `Webhook` dataclass. --------- Co-authored-by: Vlada Dusek <v.dusek96@gmail.com>
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
3 participants
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.
Description
WebhookRepresentationschema (items of the Base64-encodedwebhooksquery parameter on the run/build endpoints) declared onlyeventTypes,requestUrl,payloadTemplateandheadersTemplate, but the platform accepts and honors more fields for ad-hoc webhooks: the run-start handler spreads each webhook object into the sameinsertWebhookpath used by the create-webhook endpoint, including theidempotencyKeydedup logic.idempotencyKey,ignoreSslErrorsanddoNotRetryproperties to the schema, so generated API clients (e.g.apify-client-python) stop dropping them.