Daniel (dB.) Doubrovkine

icon indicating a website link https://code.dblock.org icon indicating an email [email protected]

icon company @opensearch-project icon location New York, NY icon location @opensearch-project, ex-@aws, former CTO @artsy @ArtsyOpenSource, @vestris, active maintainer of @ruby-grape, hashie, @slack-ruby, @playplayio and more.

Results 3350 comments of Daniel (dB.) Doubrovkine

Make parameters required or optional later

Yep, I think overwriting parameters either way is a reasonable feature request. Maybe it already works? ;)

Make parameters required or optional later

I don't have strong opinions, although I am always apprehensive about introducing new DSL language (eg. `satisfy`). I would want to just be able to say `params API::Parameters::UserParams`.

1.6.0 -> 1.6.1 contains breaking change

> @dm1try - We've updated our codebase to use `Grape::Validations::Validators:Base` > But I think it make sense to release `1.6.3` that contains this - so that the latest 1.6.x isn't...

1.6.0 -> 1.6.1 contains breaking change

Agreed. Can someone please PR a fix? @dm1try ?

grape/swagger POST arrays with embedded params don't work correctly in the UI

Does SwaggerUI claim to support these at all?

Declared broken for hash params with overlapping names

Ouch. These look like real problems. Turn your example(s) into specs and see if you can fix'em? At least PR the specs. I think the other problem is real and...

After 1.5.0 , 'route_setting :custom , key: :value' is broken with 'mount'.

Probably a bug. Turn it into a failing spec and PR that?

Dynamic namespace problem

I think your latter theory is more viable, but try to build a simpler repro maybe?

Support nested attribute names for validation error messages

If you put a project up that reproduces this I can try to help.

Support nested attribute names for validation error messages

@amrrbakry I tried it. Looked like a bug at first, but is more like a non-feature. Looking at https://github.com/ruby-grape/grape/blob/master/lib/grape/exceptions/base.rb#L73 is getting called with `registration[total_capacity]`, so the following `en.yml` yields what...