barak

This certainly looks like a bug. I'm not sure what `get_security_schemes_legacy` is. https://github.com/plangrid/flask-rebar/blob/master/flask_rebar/swagger_generation/authenticator_to_swagger.py#L166 I'm not sure how that was ever supposed to work. @airstandley - do you know what's going...

Philosophical (?) response: Let's not forget that we're using semantic versioning. Here's a description from https://semver.org/: >In the world of software management there exists a dreaded place called “dependency hell.”...

It's also worth noting that pinning the pyyaml version was only done for the `dev` extras_require, which is only included if the the dependency specifies `[dev]` (like [this](https://github.com/plangrid/flask-rebar/blob/master/.travis.yml#L28)). So we've...

+1 to @Sytten 's response. For what its worth, the PEP-8 rule only applies to names, not strings. So ```{"myAttribute": foo.my_attribute}``` is compliant. And If seeing any camelCase at all...

Agh, my bad for that breaking change. Here is a stack overflow post about this issue: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3602110/python-private-module-in-a-package Maybe we should nest most the code under `private` module?

Ah, yeah I think I bundled that up manually a long time ago. Not a good practice. I like this idea.

> 1. Should endpoints registered with rebar be allowed to return anything other than a json encoded body in the response? We already do allow endpoints to return non JSON...

My gut says we go with (2). OpenAPI 3.0 has much better support for content negotiation, and having full control over it will likely make generating the OpenAPI doc easier.

Personally, I don't think flask-rebar should aim to support Pydantic. I think this would be trying to do too many things. Flask-rebar is mostly a little glue between the real...

Figured - thanks!