You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Two things need a decision from you rather than a review.
PR #176 changes behavior for projects already using those options. As of 0.9.0 the options are accepted but inert, so a project with :response-examples-for: in its docs has been getting it silently ignored. After the fix it takes effect and the rendered output changes. I think that's correct, since the options are documented as working, but you may want it called out in the changelog.
I haven't opened a PR for issue #172 yet, because it needs a direction call first. There's a comment on that issue with the details. The short version is that issues #172, #168, and #160 all come out of the same few lines deciding how a generated value becomes a rendered body, so a single fix could close all three. Three separate PRs work too. Tell me which shape you want and I'll write it.
On releases: is there a rhythm I should plan around, or is it as needed? I ask as a downstream consumer with a pinned version, not to rush you. The Ray documentation renders its Jobs API reference with this extension now, and I expect to want the same for the KubeRay docs, so I'd rather work with your schedule than around it.
One last thing. I'd like to keep contributing past this batch, including the dull parts. Happy to triage old issues, write reproducers for reports that don't have one, or review incoming PRs. I'm not asking for commit rights. I'd rather be a regular contributor than someone who drops five patches and disappears. Tell me what would actually be useful.
I'd love to see progress on this module. One of our contributors started to build a separate solution on https://codeberg.org/walpo/sphinx-openapi-renderer to address some shortcomings here. Perhaps shared maintenance would be a way to go?
Hi @stephenfin,
I opened five PRs against master. Collecting them here so you don't have to reconstruct the set, with a question about releases at the end.
All five are green on the full matrix. Each one closes a single issue and adds a regression test. Roughly cheapest first:
_httpdomain.py. A summary written as a YAML block scalar renders literal**on the page.openapi30.pyandopenapi31.py. The request body'ssourcecodeblock never gets closed, so docutils warns and-Wbuilds fail. Both renderers carry the same bug, and fixing only the 3.0 copy would have been a no-op for 3.1 users.KeyError: 'properties'on a non-object request body.Noneinoption_specare rejected as unknown options. The reporter's patch was right, and one shared converter covershttp-methods-orderas well.allOfthat targets a non-object schema crashes example generation. That shape is what code generators emit for a documented enum property, so it probably affects more specs than the report suggests.Two things need a decision from you rather than a review.
PR #176 changes behavior for projects already using those options. As of 0.9.0 the options are accepted but inert, so a project with
:response-examples-for:in its docs has been getting it silently ignored. After the fix it takes effect and the rendered output changes. I think that's correct, since the options are documented as working, but you may want it called out in the changelog.I haven't opened a PR for issue #172 yet, because it needs a direction call first. There's a comment on that issue with the details. The short version is that issues #172, #168, and #160 all come out of the same few lines deciding how a generated value becomes a rendered body, so a single fix could close all three. Three separate PRs work too. Tell me which shape you want and I'll write it.
On releases: is there a rhythm I should plan around, or is it as needed? I ask as a downstream consumer with a pinned version, not to rush you. The Ray documentation renders its Jobs API reference with this extension now, and I expect to want the same for the KubeRay docs, so I'd rather work with your schedule than around it.
One last thing. I'd like to keep contributing past this batch, including the dull parts. Happy to triage old issues, write reproducers for reports that don't have one, or review incoming PRs. I'm not asking for commit rights. I'd rather be a regular contributor than someone who drops five patches and disappears. Tell me what would actually be useful.
Thanks for maintaining this.
Douglas