-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54
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
feat: allow servers and channels to be defined as components #133
feat: allow servers and channels to be defined as components #133
Conversation
b70330f
to
fc12b93
Compare
fc12b93
to
0eafa78
Compare
The destination branch is already there (it was already created) and this PR is targeting to be merged into it. If there are no other changes to introduce in |
hah, I got confused, sorry 😅 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
looks good but we need to wait for #139 and then you will need to solve some conflicts |
my approval won't make much sense as you will anyway have conflicts, which means additional commits that will cause a dismiss of my approval 😄 |
But it means a lot to my ❤️ , @derberg. Kidding, yeah you are right. Let's wait for those conflicts to come and get resolved! |
Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed! |
This branch is now up-to-date with |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/dnm
asyncapi/spec#665 merged, so merging this one too /rtm |
🎉 This PR is included in version 2.13.0-2022-01-release.3 🎉 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Description
This PR is part of asyncapi/spec#660.
It allows both
servers
andchannels
to be defined as (and referenced from) components, meaning the following will be now valid:You can see the diff between this new schema
2.3.0
vs the previous2.2.0
here: https://www.diffnow.com/report/l7ib3Alternative, attached here:
Related issue(s)
asyncapi/spec#660