We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
operationID
Multiple different endpoints are using the same value for operationID of enterprise-admin/get-manage-settings
enterprise-admin/get-manage-settings
GET /manage/v1/config/apply/events
GET /manage/v1/config/settings
GET /manage/v1/config/apply
POST /manage/v1/config/apply
Each endpoint has it's own uniuqe operationID The the OpenAPI specs be free of bugs like this one that prevents it's usage
N/A as it concerns the schema definitions and not actual response data
I would like to suggest that the OpenAPI specs be passed through a linter of the likes of Redocly before publishing to minimize any bugs like this
See octokit/openapi-types.ts#429 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@wolfy1339 thanks for the heads up - I've reached out to the team who created these operations, shouldn't be too hard to fix.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Bcp14
BCP14
No branches or pull requests
Schema Inaccuracy
Multiple different endpoints are using the same value for
operationID
ofenterprise-admin/get-manage-settings
GET /manage/v1/config/apply/events
GET /manage/v1/config/settings
GET /manage/v1/config/apply
POST /manage/v1/config/apply
Expected
Each endpoint has it's own uniuqe
operationID
The the OpenAPI specs be free of bugs like this one that prevents it's usage
Reproduction Steps
N/A as it concerns the schema definitions and not actual response data
Suggested solution
I would like to suggest that the OpenAPI specs be passed through a linter of the likes of Redocly before publishing to minimize any bugs like this
See octokit/openapi-types.ts#429 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: