Use detail value for notes
#286
Conversation
| @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ | |||
| * [#266](https://github.com/tim-vandecasteele/grape-swagger/pull/266): Respect primitive mapping on type and format attributes of 1.2 swagger spec - [@frodrigo](https://github.com/frodrigo). | |||
| * [#268](https://github.com/tim-vandecasteele/grape-swagger/pull/268): Fixed handling of `type: Array[...]` - [@frodrigo](https://github.com/frodrigo). | |||
| * [#284](https://github.com/tim-vandecasteele/grape-swagger/pull/284): Use new params syntax for swagger doc endpoint, fix an issue that `:name` params not recognized by `declared` method -[@calfzhou](https://github.com/calfzhou). | |||
| * [#286](https://github.com/tim-vandecasteele/grape-swagger/pull/286): Use `detail` value for `notes` - fix an issue where `detail` value specified in a block passed to `desc` was ignored. -[@rngtng](https://github.com/rngtng). | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's an extra period after ignored. :)
I think these are two separate problems, so there should be two separate lines.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need to update README on this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
well, yes a shot note in README would help. I'll add it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
done, what do you think? I did not mention notes: as its deprecated soon(?) anyway.
|
I forgot something, I think we need an entry for https://github.com/tim-vandecasteele/grape-swagger/blob/master/UPGRADING.md. If you were using notes before it will get overwritten by detail now, right? That's what we want, but it should be called out to avoid surprises. |
|
Next, the build will run against many versions of Grape. It will be failing now, and needs to be fixed somehow, probably with a |
|
ok sure, are there any plans to drop support for older grape versions? beeing backwards compatible to the last, let's say, three previous version sounds reasonable to me.. |
|
In theory yes, in practice not really. I think we should drop support only if there's a good reason. Interestingly this is the first feature as far as I know. I would be willing to drop support for something major, like https://github.com/tim-vandecasteele/grape-swagger/issues/219 |
|
ok sure fine with me. |
|
ok added minor updates, mainly README & UPGRADING |
| @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ gemspec | |||
|
|
|||
| case version = ENV['GRAPE_VERSION'] || '~> 0.9.0' | |||
| when 'HEAD' | |||
| gem 'grape', github: 'intridea/grape' | |||
| gem 'grape', github: 'ruby-grape/grape' | |||
|
I don't see UPGRADING.md changes :( |
This line can be deleted, as the next line overwrites the value anyway. Looks like a classic cope&paste typo
This adds support for using the `detail` value defined within a block passed to `desc` as `notes` value exposed in swagger doc. CAUTION: only works on grape version > 0.10.0 ``` $ GRAPE_VERSION=HEAD bundle exec rspec ./spec/default_api_spec.rb:62 ``` fixes #212
|
sorry, changes are now pushed. |
|
Very good, merging. |
|
great, thanks! |
|
cool! |
Use
detailvalue fornotesThis adds support for using the
detailvalue defined within a block passed todescasnotesvalue exposed in swagger doc. Next I'd deprecatenotesand preferdetailas specified by grape instead.CAUTION: only works on grape version >= 0.12.0
fixes #212
Please have a look at the spec, is this the right format and place to put? I had a hard time to figure out how the specs are structured. pls advise what’s preferred approach..