Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: JSON Merge Patch test #1

Closed
wants to merge 21 commits into from

Conversation

AnimeshKumar923
Copy link
Owner

Test branch to keep the the work separated

Changes:
- make the script handle the array object for the 'message example
  object'
- "json_pointer":"/components/messages/userSignUp/examples
- will have to make it generalized
Changes:

- update script to handle array objects at the target location
- update spec with jsonPointer to add contents inside the arrays object
Copy link

@github-actions github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Welcome to AsyncAPI. Thanks a lot for creating your first pull request. Please check out our contributors guide useful for opening a pull request.
Keep in mind there are also other channels you can use to interact with AsyncAPI community. For more details check out this issue.

Changes:
- i'm assuming due to the following section of code the replacement was
  not being done correctly in other places. After replacing it with the
  earlier logic, it's working and replacing fine and as expected
Changes:
- change json pointer from String Reperesentation to
  URI Fragment Identifier Representation
- more info here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6901#section-6
- suggested by Sergio for the sake of consistency
Changes:
- combined base doc
- attempt to create a combined base doc for better management, instead
  of having two separate docs
Changes:
- modify example, remove line which was causing the error
- modufy script to take the new combined doc as the input
Changes:
- modify example to match the correct format of the spec
- add new sub-heading to denote what kind of OAuth Flow is
- applied suggestion from: asyncapi#1059 (comment)
@AnimeshKumar923
Copy link
Owner Author

Testing done and original PR merged. Closing

Ref: asyncapi#1059

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