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

Allow references for responses fixes #84 #89

Closed

Conversation

trekdemo
Copy link

@trekdemo trekdemo commented Jul 12, 2016

fixes #84

@trekdemo trekdemo force-pushed the allow_references_for_responses branch from 38ec1ac to 8479edf Compare July 12, 2016 11:45
@trekdemo
Copy link
Author

@westfield-labs are you still maintaining this project?

@trekdemo
Copy link
Author

@hornc Sorry to bother you, but I saw you did the latest merge. Any thoughts on this?

@ashoda
Copy link
Collaborator

ashoda commented Dec 12, 2016

@trekdemo thanks for submitting this PR. We will review #84 and this PR shortly.

when response_data.schema
Fragment.new(['#', 'paths', path, verb, 'responses', response_code, 'schema'])
when (ref = response_data['$ref'])
Fragment.new(ref.split('/'))

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what's the result here? seems you are missing 'schema'

Fragment.new(ref.split('/').push('schema'))

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@lucasrenan I'm not sure why would we missing a 'schema'. ref holds the value of the path to the schema definition. Eg.: in the added test it's '#/definitions/service'. And that's exactly the path to the schema definition at the end of file: https://github.com/westfieldlabs/apivore/pull/89/files#diff-65c886d34e6323742cba1cd52731ecc5R129

@trekdemo trekdemo force-pushed the allow_references_for_responses branch 2 times, most recently from 24cd409 to cb62017 Compare October 22, 2019 11:36
@trekdemo trekdemo force-pushed the allow_references_for_responses branch from cb62017 to aac8f01 Compare October 28, 2019 10:50
@trekdemo
Copy link
Author

@ashoda any update on the review?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Allow references for responses
5 participants