Closed fbuys closed 7 months ago
I agree. dry-schema looks great.
@troessner WDYT? I think you picked Kwalify originally so may have more of an opinion on this.
Yeah, I think when I picked Kwalify dry-schema didn't exist yet, time flies 😆 I agree that dry-schema looks great, would certainly be open to a PR that introduces it!
I'll try to open a PR soon that adds dry-schema, seems like that might be a 2 in 1 win (fixing this issue and https://github.com/troessner/reek/pull/1741).
Thank you very much for the feedback @mvz and @troessner 🙇
I opened a PR that could close this issue
The current validator seems outdated and lacks good documentation.
A recent issue showed that we could improve the schema validation to also check and warn against missing configurations See: #1734
dry-schema provide good documentation and it looks like it also provides the features we require.