2 ms·
Yeah. That's how huge sprawling multi-language projects typically work. People who are interested in specific stacks maintain the code generation for those stac
by yawaramin 2y ago
Yeah. That's how huge sprawling multi-language projects typically work. People who are interested in specific stacks maintain the code generation for those stacks. Stacks which are inherently less popular receive less attention in the OpenAPI ecosystem as well. It's very similar with Protobuf, Thrift, etc. There's no magic wand to automatically maintain the codegen for all stacks.
Also not sure how OpenAPI is supposed to support AWS as a target. Do you mean that AWS doesn't support OpenAPI specs for their JSON HTTP services? Pretty sure that's because they use Smithy: https://smithy.io/2.0/index.html https://smithy.io/2.0/index.html
- taeric 2y agoI mean, this doesn't change the complaint? I wasn't even looking in JavaScript at the time. The support in Python was... less than pleasant. Couldn't even do documentation generation well, as most of those plugins for sphinx still relied on the older swagger schema. Close enough to be a pain in the neck. For supporting AWS, API Gateway has some efforts to support OpenAPI. It is a lot like the documentation problem. Close enough to be a pain in the neck. So, the question is ultimately what did it help me do? I had a pleasant feeling of following standards for the intro. That is about it. Nothing was disastrous, I don't recall. Just a lot of paper cuts on things not working as hoped by the documentation. I grew to call it aspirational documentation.