ruby-grape / ruby-grape/grape-swagger
Discussion: definitions name convention
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
discuss!
swagger-2.0
- Dominant language
- Ruby
- Stars
- 1.1k
- Forks
- 479
- Avg merge
- 2d 14h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 6
Description
In light of the discussion in https://github.com/ruby-grape/grape-swagger/pull/515
My proposal is to introduce less magic/assumptions and be more clear about the naming of the definitions.
def model_name(entity)
if entity.respond_to?(:entity_name)
entity.entity_name
else
entity.name
end
end
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading the discussion in pull request 515 and the six comments on this issue. Review the proposed model_name behavior and determine whether the project agrees on a definitions naming convention; done would require an agreed scope before implementation can be identified.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- ruby
- Domain
- api, documentation
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100