Open adzest opened 3 years ago
@adzest Were you able to find a work around for this bug?
Thank you
@viclovsky I'm also facing this issue . Will this be fixed ? Thanks !
Hi, no, we patch the yml or json source file before usage.
On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 at 04:50, KK @.***> wrote:
@adzest https://github.com/adzest Were you able to find a work around for this issue?
Thank you
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/viclovsky/swagger-coverage/issues/83#issuecomment-1012701675, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACG5PRORB7JVYNF5W6TS54TUV6FPBANCNFSM44VJ4DTQ . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>
--
Best regard,
Oleksii Isakov
Cell +38 098 302 0018 | Skype: alex.isakov3
LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=196966332&trk=hb_tab_pro_top | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/aleksej.isakov.14 | VK http://vk.com/isakov.aleksey
I'm submitting a ...
What is the current behavior?
Coverage report score 0% and a parameter is 'null' If the openapi3 spec contains parameter as ref to component/parameters block: `paths: /pets: get: summary: List all pets operationId: listPets tags:
...
components: parameters: pets_limit: name: limit in: query description: How many items to return at one time (max 100) required: false schema: type: integer format: int32 example: 1`
If the current behavior is a bug, please provide steps to reproduce, broken swagger specification, and swagger-coverage-output:
schema: $ref: "#/components/schemas/Pets" default: description: unexpected error content: application/json: schema: $ref: "#/components/schemas/Error" post: summary: Create a pet operationId: createPets tags:
./1.4.1/bin/swagger-coverage-commandline
What is the expected behavior?
Coverage has a 'limit' parameter.
What is the motivation/use case for changing the behavior?
Expected behavior for base open spec functionality.
Other information
tag_name: 1.4.1