Migrated many schemas to strict validation

[Vessel9817]

Each commit modifies a single file, or otherwise applies a single patch. This may be exempt if there is a circular dependency.

[madskristensen]

This has a merge conflict.

[Vessel9817]

Thanks again! Just to check, do you prefer the individual PR strategy, or are lump PRs like this easier to work with?

[Vessel9817]

I only ask, because it'd be really easy to:

• cherry-pick a combined PR like this into separate PRs; or
• merge multiple PRs into one grand PR.

As it's not exactly commonplace to be fiddling with a large quantity of unrelated schemas all at once, I would like to hear your thoughts so that we can prevent future misunderstandings and simplify your workflow. I'd happily go as far as to update the contributing guidelines to reflect your preferences, intended for large changes.

Frankly, lacking the experience, I can't imagine reviewing all these commits. I can't thank you both enough for your continued time and dedication.

[hyperupcall]

@Vessel9817 Do you think that it would be difficult to rework these and have separate PRs for each "type" of change"? For example, one or a few PR for very minor changes that won't break things, like adding "type": "object" and similar. These will be larger and we can merge these with little worry.

And then, having separate PRs for larger things that aren't automatic changes or have the potential to change behavior. Those would be separate and these PRs should naturally be smaller.

[hyperupcall]

And thank you for your comment and concerns