fix: unify Message and MessageTrait examples description

[char0n]

Refs #604

[sonarqubecloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
No Duplication information

[magicmatatjahu]

LGTM @derberg @fmvilas do you want to add something?

[derberg]

it touches the specification, bug fix imho and therefore fix: that will have to trigger 2.1.1 release. We have the same issue in json schema -> https://github.com/asyncapi/spec-json-schemas/blob/master/schemas/2.1.0.json#L934 instead of https://github.com/asyncapi/spec-json-schemas/blob/master/schemas/2.1.0.json#L699

[magicmatatjahu]

@derberg I think that it is editorial change, because we "missed" changing the description of the examples in the Message Trait Object, so docs: is enough for me - it other words, Message Trait Object inheritances the shape from Message Object, so we don't change its shape, but only fix it.

I also agree that json-schemas should be updated.

[derberg]

but only fix it

exactly, we fix it 😄 and fix is so significant that even json schema needs an update. This would be our first patch release so better to wait for @fmvilas opinion too. For now, it is 2.1.1 for me, pure bug fix in the specification, not simple editorial change.

@char0n is it ok for you to provide a fix in a JSON Schema too? Let us discuss there on PR but I guess to avoid "forgetting" things in the future, examples should be reused from definitions

[magicmatatjahu]

but only fix it

I shouldn't write it 😆 For me it's editorial change.

[char0n]

@derberg yep I'll amend the metaschema as well

[char0n]

@derberg schema fixed in asyncapi/spec-json-schemas#85

[fmvilas]

LGTM 👍

[magicmatatjahu]

LGTM

[derberg]

@fmvilas you need to share your opinion on PR title as for me it is fix: and for @magicmatatjahu it is docs:

if we agree with fix: we should rather push it to release branch and release in a week together with 2.2 release

[fmvilas]

It's indeed a fix. The previous meaning was different than the current meaning.

[derberg]

@char0n can you please change base branch to release branch for this one, the one that points to September release?

[char0n]

I've changed the base but I'd have to redo the PR so that unrelated commits are not visible here. I'll do it first thing tommorow morning.

[derberg]

rebasing with release branch should do the trick, no?

[sonarqubecloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
No Duplication information

[char0n]

PR force-pushed and rebased on top of 2021-09-release