search

apiaryio / refract-message-body-generator

Generates message bodies from JSON Schema found within Refract API Description
MIT License
0 stars 0 forks source link

Initial version #1

Closed Baggz closed 8 years ago

XVincentX commented 8 years ago

Tests are not running

Update: Fixed.

Baggz commented 8 years ago

@XVincentX

Tests are not running

Just enabled CircleCI.

Baggz commented 8 years ago

@XVincentX

I have addressed you comments, please rereview.

Thanks!

Baggz commented 8 years ago

Passing!

XVincentX commented 8 years ago

I can still see .DS_Store files within this PR

Update: Fixed.

Baggz commented 8 years ago

@XVincentX

I can still see .DS_Store files within this PR

Dang, will fix.

JackuB commented 8 years ago

.editorconfig is missing

Baggz commented 8 years ago

@JackuB

.editorconfig is missing

Fixed in https://github.com/apiaryio/refract-message-body-generator/commit/aacce40e1d4a9893fd346ca24368d70006e0a801, thanks!

XVincentX commented 8 years ago

Ok from my side.

I may be missing something, but I can't see the reaso this thing should be a separate library. It's just 70 lines of code, I struggle to see any other use outside fury-adapter and setting up the repo / CI / npm package and all this stuff around took more time that write the library itself.

Almad commented 8 years ago

@XVincentX I do see a use outside of it.

I do wonder, about the size vs. time to write the library myself, and will look into it. I would also be interested in knowing how long the setup is for you—last time I did it (with lib generator), it was under one hour, if it's longer, we should probably consider automating.

XVincentX commented 8 years ago

@Almad Ok, that's a prove that

I may be missing something.

I totally agree that the lib template should be improved. I already filed some issues and others probably will come.

Almad commented 8 years ago

@XVincentX Good, thanks.

I still fail to see how fixing each of those issues is more than few minutes on the generated code.

I do admit I wasn't expecting the faker to be working that well, and I think we are still going to need to iterate on that once we'll close the loop.

With that, I am even more confused...will look into it next week.

XVincentX commented 8 years ago

@Almad Well, that's my fault. I perceived so much time without considering the idea that people were probably working on something different. Apologies!