Conversation
soartec-lab
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@TheHaff
Thanks for the suggestion. Let me check before looking at the source code.
Wouldn't it be enough to narrow down the target endpoints by changing the tags?
In the case of tags, you can specify them on an endpoint-by-endpoint basis, and filters already exist.
|
This is more for the case of frontend people working towards a monolithic big boi backend. I wouldn't dare go in there and change stuff and this allows me to avoid unused endpoints. I will also be adding some more checks like if path not found or method not found to make it a bit more robust. |
|
@TheHaff But I have to ask: input.override.transformer isn't it suitable for the task of path filtering? |
You could use Differences
|
+ feat: enhance path filtering with validation for unmatched filters - Implemented validation for unmatched path filters in the API builder. - Updated the import-open-api module to include path filtering and validation. - Refactored the getFilteredOperations function to utilize the new filtering logic. - Added logging for unmatched filters to improve user feedback.
|
@TheHaff up to you. Either would be great. |
|
I have this as a patched version in my project for now, If this makes sense for the project it would be great to get this in. Maybe my case is too niche? You can imagine having a bunch of micro service backend calls mixed in with the exposed frontend calls. I don't have direct say or capacity at backend to organize tags. |
|
Where are we with this PR? |
Status
READY
Description
I had a local script that pruned my openapi file and thought maybe you would like the same functionality.
The signature is [pathUrl, [get, delete]].
Related PRs
List related PRs against other branches:
Todos
Steps to Test or Reproduce
Outline the steps to test or reproduce the PR here.