This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 8, 2024. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 280
Dredd is not using just the 1st req-res pair within APIB transaction examples #615
Labels
Comments
honzajavorek
added
bug
behavior change
aka breaking change
Context: API Blueprint
labels
Aug 24, 2016
honzajavorek
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 24, 2016
This change tests and fixes a problem introduced with migration to API Elements in order to support Swagger in Dredd. Original implementation always selected the first request-response pair from each transaction example. This wasn't re-implemented correctly on top of API Elements. Instead, all specified responses are appearing, which breaks Dredd's behavior in many ways. Respective test was ported, but unfortunately with the same mistake. This commit fixes the situation. Some early adopters discovered the issue and considered it to be a new feature, but it really breaks how Dredd should work at the moment and needs to be removed. It leads to duplicate transaction names and other undefined behavior. In order to implement #25 and #78, which many believed happened when they discovered the bug, much more work needs to be done. Namely designing and adopting a new way of addressing transactions in Dredd #227. Closes #615 BREAKING CHANGE
honzajavorek
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 24, 2016
This change tests and fixes a problem introduced with migration to API Elements in order to support Swagger in Dredd. Original implementation always selected the first request-response pair from each transaction example. This wasn't re-implemented correctly on top of API Elements. Instead, all specified responses are appearing, which breaks Dredd's behavior in many ways. Respective test was ported, but unfortunately with the same mistake. This commit fixes the situation. Some early adopters discovered the issue and considered it to be a new feature, but it really breaks how Dredd should work at the moment and needs to be removed. It leads to duplicate transaction names and other undefined behavior. In order to implement #25 and #78, which many believed happened when they discovered the bug, much more work needs to be done. Namely designing and adopting a new way of addressing transactions in Dredd #227. Closes #615 BREAKING CHANGE
honzajavorek
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 24, 2016
BREAKING CHANGE: This change tests and fixes a problem introduced with migration to API Elements in order to support Swagger in Dredd. Original implementation always selected the first request-response pair from each transaction example. This wasn't re-implemented correctly on top of API Elements. Instead, all specified responses are appearing, which breaks Dredd's behavior in many ways. Respective test was ported, but unfortunately with the same mistake. This commit fixes the situation. Some early adopters discovered the issue and considered it to be a new feature, but it really breaks how Dredd should work at the moment and needs to be removed. It leads to duplicate transaction names and other undefined behavior. In order to implement #25 and #78, which many believed happened when they discovered the bug, much more work needs to be done. Namely designing and adopting a new way of addressing transactions in Dredd #227. Closes #615
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
There is a problem introduced with migration to API Elements in order to support Swagger in Dredd. Original implementation always selected the first request-response pair from each transaction example. This wasn't re-implemented correctly on top of API Elements. Instead, all specified responses are appearing, which breaks Dredd's behavior in many ways. Respective test was ported, but unfortunately with the same mistake.
Some early adopters (cc @philsturgeon) discovered the issue and considered it to be a new feature, but it really breaks how Dredd should work at the moment and needs to be removed 😞 It leads to duplicate transaction names and other undefined behavior.
In order to implement #25 and #78, which many believed happened when they discovered the bug, much more work needs to be done. Namely designing and adopting a new way of addressing transactions in Dredd #227.
Fix is on its way in apiaryio/dredd-transactions#61 This issue is labeled as "behavior change" since it is behavior change for those who already upgraded, but in fact it's a regression fix, i.e. return of the previous behavior. To communicate this change, Dredd's major version will be bumped.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: