release: 2.9.0

[stainless-app]

Automated Release PR

2.9.0 (2025-08-26)

Full Changelog: v2.8.0...v2.9.0

Features

• api-v2: api v2 spec (48aff10)
• api!: manual updates (4ce79dc)
• api: new parameters (5a7dc00)
• api: org apis (ec5d611)
• docs: updating documented docs for stainless (444bab6)
• docs: updating documented docs for stainless (316e546)

Chores

• update github action (cd673e1)

---

This pull request is managed by Stainless's GitHub App.

The semver version number is based on included commit messages. Alternatively, you can manually set the version number in the title of this pull request.

For a better experience, it is recommended to use either rebase-merge or squash-merge when merging this pull request.

🔗 Stainless website
📚 Read the docs
🙋 Reach out for help or questions

[stainless-app]

🧪 Testing

To try out this version of the SDK, run:

pip install 'https://pkg.stainless.com/s/openint-python/ec5d611b5fa1068f0d7fbd5611f290cc4af75aac/openint-2.8.0-py3-none-any.whl'

Expires: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 04:49:06 GMT

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed everything up to 9aa6207 in 2 minutes and 15 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 2226 lines of code in 26 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 33 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. tests/api_resources/test_client.py:80

• Draft comment:
  Ensure that the regex patterns in test_path_params_assign_connection exactly match the error messages thrown by assign_connection’s validation logic. This will avoid false negatives if error text changes.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment looked like it was already resolved.

2. tests/test_client.py:1274

• Draft comment:
  The multipart form-data response test hardcodes the exact split output. Consider using a multipart parser or more flexible assertions to verify parts, as encoding details may change and break this fragile test.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

3. tests/test_client.py:999

• Draft comment:
  The memory leak detection test (test_copy_build_request) filters out leaks based on file name fragments. This approach is sensitive to refactoring of internal modules. Ensure these filters remain current with any internal changes.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

4. tests/test_client.py:1112

• Draft comment:
  This test confirms that passing a synchronous httpx.Client to AsyncOpenint raises a TypeError. Verify that this behavior remains consistent with the design and document it if needed.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

5. tests/test_client.py:1

• Draft comment:
  These test files contain a large amount of duplicated and extensive test logic for both sync and async clients. For maintainability and readability, consider refactoring and splitting tests into separate modules or suites for synchronous and asynchronous functionality.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

6. README.md:192

• Draft comment:
  It looks like there's a stray ): on line 192. Please remove or clarify this line as it appears to be an accidental insertion.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The comment is clearly incorrect. The code is properly formatted and the ) on line 192 is a necessary part of the code example showing how to configure the client with max_retries. There is no stray : character at all. Could there be some formatting or whitespace issue that the tool is picking up that isn't visible in the plain text? Could there be a hidden character? Even if there were hidden characters, the code as shown is syntactically correct Python and the comment is factually wrong about there being a stray : character. The comment should be deleted as it is factually incorrect - there is no stray : character and the code is properly formatted.

7. api.md:12

• Draft comment:
  Typo in 'CreateConnnectorConfigResponse': it appears 'Connector' is misspelled with an extra 'n'. Please update it to 'CreateConnectorConfigResponse'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

8. api.md:17

• Draft comment:
  Typo in 'GetConectorConfigResponse': it appears 'Connector' is missing an 'n'. Please update it to 'GetConnectorConfigResponse'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

9. api.md:24

• Draft comment:
  Typo in 'ListConnnectorConfigsResponse': it appears 'Connector' is misspelled with an extra 'n'. Please update it to 'ListConnectorConfigsResponse'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

10. api.md:37

• Draft comment:
  Typo: 'create_connnector_config' contains an extra 'n'. Should be 'create_connector_config'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

11. api.md:42

• Draft comment:
  Typo: 'get_conector_config' is missing a 't'. Should be 'get_connector_config'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

12. api.md:49

• Draft comment:
  Typo: 'list_connnector_configs' contains an extra 'n'. Should be 'list_connector_configs'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

13. api.md:52

• Draft comment:
  Typo: 'upsert_connnector_config' contains an extra 'n'. Should be 'upsert_connector_config'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

14. src/openint/_client.py:77

• Draft comment:
  Typo detected in module name: 'get_conector_config_response' seems to be missing an extra 'n'. Consider renaming to 'get_connector_config_response' for consistency with 'delete_connector_config_response'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

15. src/openint/_client.py:80

• Draft comment:
  Typo detected in module name: 'list_connnector_configs_response' has three 'n's. Likely should be 'list_connector_configs_response'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

16. src/openint/_client.py:81

• Draft comment:
  Typo detected in module name: 'create_connnector_config_response' has an extra 'n'. Likely should be 'create_connector_config_response'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

17. src/openint/_client.py:82

• Draft comment:
  Typo detected in module name: 'upsert_connnector_config_response' has an extra 'n'. Likely should be 'upsert_connector_config_response'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

18. src/openint/_client.py:568

• Draft comment:
  Typographical error: The function name get_conector_config is missing an 'n'. Consider renaming it to get_connector_config for consistency.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

19. src/openint/_client.py:3239

• Draft comment:
  There's a potential typo: 'UpsertConnnectorConfigResponse' appears to have an extra 'n' in 'connnector'. It might be intended to be 'UpsertConnectorConfigResponse'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

20. src/openint/_client.py:3359

• Draft comment:
  Typographical error: The method name 'get_conector_config' appears to be missing an 'n'. Consider renaming it to 'get_connector_config' for consistency.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

21. src/openint/_client.py:3423

• Draft comment:
  Typographical error: The attribute name get_conector_config appears to be misspelled. It should likely be get_connector_config to be consistent with similar method names.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

22. src/openint/_client.py:3551

• Draft comment:
  Typo: The method name get_conector_config appears to be missing an extra 'n'. It might be intended to be get_connector_config for consistency. Consider updating it.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

23. src/openint/types/__init__.py:25

• Draft comment:
  Typo: In the module name 'get_conector_config_response', it appears 'connector' is misspelled (missing an extra 'n'). Consider renaming to 'get_connector_config_response' if that is the intended name.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

24. src/openint/types/__init__.py:32

• Draft comment:
  Typo: The module name 'list_connnector_configs_response' contains an extra 'n' (three instead of the standard two). Please verify and correct the spelling if necessary.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

25. src/openint/types/__init__.py:33

• Draft comment:
  Typo: In 'client_get_conector_config_params', 'connector' is misspelled (missing an 'n'). Consider renaming to 'client_get_connector_config_params' if that is intended.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

26. src/openint/types/__init__.py:34

• Draft comment:
  Typo: The module name 'create_connnector_config_response' contains an extra 'n' (should likely be 'create_connector_config_response'). Please confirm and fix if needed.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

27. src/openint/types/__init__.py:35

• Draft comment:
  Typo: The module name 'upsert_connnector_config_response' contains an extra 'n' (should likely be 'upsert_connector_config_response').
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

28. src/openint/types/__init__.py:39

• Draft comment:
  Typo: In 'client_list_connnector_configs_params', the string 'connector' appears with an extra 'n'. Verify if this should be 'client_list_connector_configs_params'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

29. src/openint/types/get_connection_response.py:12814

• Draft comment:
  Typo: The class name "ConnectorPostgresDiscriminatedConnectionSettingsSettings" appears to include the word "Settings" twice. Was this intentional?
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

30. tests/api_resources/test_client.py:453

• Draft comment:
  Typo: The test method name 'test_method_get_conector_config' appears to be misspelled. It should be 'test_method_get_connector_config' (with a double 'n') for consistency with other similar methods.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

31. tests/api_resources/test_client.py:1374

• Draft comment:
  Typo: The function name 'test_method_get_conector_config' and the call to 'get_conector_config' appear to have a missing 'n'. They should be spelled 'connector' instead of 'conector'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

32. tests/test_client.py:710

• Draft comment:
  Typographical suggestion: In the function name 'test_retrying_timeout_errors_doesnt_leak', consider using the contraction "doesn't" (with an apostrophe) for better readability.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% Python function names should use snake_case and typically avoid apostrophes. While grammatically correct in English, adding an apostrophe to a function name would be unconventional in Python and could potentially cause issues. The current name follows standard Python naming conventions. Am I being too strict about Python conventions? Maybe readability is more important than following conventions exactly? No, in this case following Python conventions is correct. Function names should be simple snake_case without special characters. The current name is clear enough and follows standard practices. The comment should be deleted. The current function name follows Python conventions correctly and adding an apostrophe would be non-standard and potentially problematic.

33. tests/test_client.py:722

• Draft comment:
  Typographical suggestion: In the function name 'test_retrying_status_errors_doesnt_leak', consider using the contraction "doesn't" (with an apostrophe) for better readability.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% Python function names typically use snake_case without apostrophes. While "doesn't" is grammatically correct in English, using "doesnt" in function names is a common convention in code. Adding an apostrophe would actually make the code less consistent with typical Python naming conventions. The current name is perfectly readable and follows standard Python practices. Could there be a style guide or project convention that prefers grammatically correct English, even in function names? Some projects might value natural language readability over typical code conventions. Looking at the rest of the codebase, other test functions use similar naming without apostrophes. This is clearly the project's convention. Additionally, apostrophes in function names can cause issues in some contexts and are generally avoided in programming. The comment should be deleted. The current function name follows Python conventions and project standards. Adding an apostrophe would make the code less consistent with typical practices.

Workflow ID: wflow_SibvPeb0puEWUibi

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[stainless-app]

🤖 Release is at https://github.com/openintegrations/python-sdk/releases/tag/v2.9.0 🌻