anvilproject / client-apis

Clients for Python, R, javascript that interact with [terra, gen3, galaxy, others]
Apache License 2.0
9 stars 5 forks source link

swagger-combine #6

Closed bwalsh closed 5 years ago

bwalsh commented 5 years ago

This PR contains 1 new feature:

From README

Overview

Downloads

Generates

Tests

Assuming this effort proceeds, there are several questions to consider:

kellrott commented 5 years ago

This seems like a good way to start the conversation about the full AnVIL API. The exact APIs may be debated, but at least this gives us the format to have the discussion.

👍

geoffjentry commented 5 years ago

Did a bit of research on this topic last week and this seemed like the best path to explore in terms of providing a single, maintainable swagger. 👍

bwalsh commented 5 years ago

@geoffjentry thanks. any objection to merging this PR?

geoffjentry commented 5 years ago

@bwalsh not from me. i don't know that i'm an authoritative voice though, not sure what the process is

mtmorgan commented 5 years ago

Should the terra api itself be part of the combined API?

There are obvious issues, e.g., duplicate operationIds

$ grep operationId api.yml |sort|wc -l
     238
$ grep operationId api.yml |sort|uniq | wc -l
     202

and (mildly) conflicting response values

$ grep -A 1 401 api.yml
        '401':
          description: The request is unauthorized.
--
        '401':
          description: The request is unauthorized.
--
        '401':
          description: unauthorized request
--
        '401':
          description: unauthorized request
--
        '401':
          description: Proxy connection unauthorized
--
        '401':
          description: Proxy connection unauthorized
--
        '401':
          description: Credentials not provided or incorrect

but presumably merging the APIs here is a step to resolving those.

Should these be introduced as (failing) tests?

geoffjentry commented 5 years ago

@mtmorgan my $0.02 would be to not let perfect (or even "works") be the benefit of the good here, and to treat this as a starting point. I'd love to see people start trying to use it to discover problems and/or digging into issues like you just did to move it forward.

However if people believe that we're more likely to move forward faster by iterating on this PR prior to merging that also works for me.

bwalsh commented 5 years ago

@mtmorgan @kellrott @geoffjentry : merging this PR. Creating issue to track martin's request