fix(linkedin): keep jobs with missing optional card fields by O-marqs · Pull Request #428 · speedyapply/JobSpy · GitHub
Skip to content

fix(linkedin): keep jobs with missing optional card fields - #428

Open
O-marqs wants to merge 1 commit into
speedyapply:mainfrom
O-marqs:fix/oss03-linkedin-optional-fields
Open

O-marqs wants to merge 1 commit into
speedyapply:mainfrom
O-marqs:fix/oss03-linkedin-optional-fields

Conversation

@O-marqs

@O-marqs O-marqs commented Oct 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

A missing company or location discards an otherwise usable LinkedIn card, although JobPost already permits these fields to be unknown. Empty title elements are accepted.

Treat missing/blank company and location as unknown, preserve a remote signal from the title and otherwise return unknown remote status without location. Reject blank titles without fetching details.

Validation on public main 8dd83cdd194b6e27f6487eb09b2b2a10117d9a1c:

  • Offline standard-library unittest: 6 test methods pass. Before the production patch, the same tests reproduce 10 failed assertions/subtests and 0 errors caused by the defects above.
  • python -m unittest discover -s tests -p test_oss03_a3.py -v
  • ruff check jobspy tests, ruff format --check jobspy tests, full configured mypy and git diff --check pass with the upstream-declared MCP extra and development dependencies installed.
  • Network guards assert that sockets, DNS and both HTTP transports are never used. Fixtures demonstrate local contracts; no current live HTML/API compatibility is claimed.

The existing local remote helper accepts a missing location; behavior for prior non-null inputs is unchanged. No alternate title selector is invented. #426 is not included; salary and identity parsing are untouched.

This is a narrowly scoped fix in the existing implementation, without architectural changes, new scrapers, dependencies, global models or workflows. No real acquisition was performed. The branch starts directly from public main and includes no private history or audit artifacts. Other contribution groups and published PR #426 are not included.

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant