fix build with kin-openapi 0.61.0#348
Conversation
Addresses changes from getkin/kin-openapi#351
|
Changes looking good. Can we get a review from a maintainer and a new release? Thanks! :) |
|
I'm guessing there's a good (legal) reason for kin-openapi to do this, I suggest |
I was wondering the same thing, but the kin PR makes no mention of any specific motivation for it. Esp. since the spec itself requires using the "swagger" name in fields, I wonder if this was either just paranoia, or desiring to be generic in the naming. Either way, I will ask the kin folks to comment here to hopefully replace speculation with information :)
This certainly would be safer, though I wonder if it would be reasonable to do in separate steps? Edit: :sigh: this may be going to change again? getkin/kin-openapi#358 |
|
Added #354 which includes the changes here, and also makes an attempt to remove the Swagger name from all APIs |
|
Hi, kin-openapi maintainer here. Please don't call us paranoid. I already spend enough time looking over my shoulder. |
Apologies if my wording came across poorly. What I meant was that I wasn't sure if this was a pro-active change made to err on the side of safety, or if there had been a specific request / letter from the Swagger/SmartBear folks to not use their name in your library. |
|
I came looking for this PR as I have a project in which I attempted to update all of the dependencies, only for it to fail due to the generated spec using properties defined by |
|
Another +1 for merging this. The instructions as written currently don't work. |
* fix build with kin-openapi 0.61.0 Addresses changes from getkin/kin-openapi#351 * go mod tidy
* fix build with kin-openapi 0.61.0 Addresses changes from getkin/kin-openapi#351 * go mod tidy
* fix build with kin-openapi 0.61.0 Addresses changes from getkin/kin-openapi#351 * go mod tidy
Addresses changes from getkin/kin-openapi#351