Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat : add openapi 3 support #333

Merged
merged 47 commits into from
Jan 26, 2021
Merged

feat : add openapi 3 support #333

merged 47 commits into from
Jan 26, 2021

Conversation

climba03003
Copy link
Member

@climba03003 climba03003 commented Jan 11, 2021

Feedback are welcome while construction.

This PR used to add minimal support for OpenAPI 3. I do not assume complicated situation.

Issue related to OpenAPI 3
Resolve: #87, Resolve: #236, Resolve #265, Resolve #330
PR related to OpenAPI 3
Closes: #237

TODO List

  • refactor: reduce the number of files in root folder
  • refactor: extract common function in dynamic.js
  • feat: add openapi 3 support
  • feat: add translation layer between swagger 2 and openapi 3 (maybe in next PR, too much work required)

Checklist

- reduce the number of files in root folder
- hook
- formatParamUrl
- consumesFormOnly
- plainJsonObjectToSwagger2
- localRefResolve
@mcollina
Copy link
Member

huge +1 for the refactor.

@darkgl0w
Copy link
Member

Really nice to see a refactor and an upgrade in features for this package :D
I will follow your work on this PR and will be happy to review it ^^

@climba03003 climba03003 marked this pull request as ready for review January 11, 2021 11:03
@climba03003 climba03003 changed the title WIP : add openapi 3 support feat : add openapi 3 support Jan 11, 2021
@climba03003
Copy link
Member Author

climba03003 commented Jan 11, 2021

Basic Functionality for OpenAPI 3 is added. In order to make thing simple and not dealing with the transition between swagger 2.0 and openapi 3.0. I decide to add a new option openapi. It may not be the ideal solution but it is the fastest way to get thing ready with semver-minor.

It should fix most of the issue with oneOf and anyOf. I will just add them all in this PR.

Maybe in the future, someone is willing to add a transition layer between swagger 2.0 and openapi 3.0.

@climba03003
Copy link
Member Author

TypeScript type will not updated for now. As #328 dealing with it.

@mcollina
Copy link
Member

@Eomm @SkeLLLa could you take a look?

lib/util.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/util.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/util.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/util.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/util.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/util.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/util.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/util.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/util.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/openapi.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/openapi.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/openapi.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/openapi.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/openapi.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/openapi.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/openapi.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/openapi.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/dynamic.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@mcollina
Copy link
Member

semver-major given the extent of the change?

@jsumners
Copy link
Member

semver-major given the extent of the change?

I think that's a good idea.

@mcollina
Copy link
Member

This is missing some documentation update.

@climba03003
Copy link
Member Author

I will complete it today and also the typing update.

Copy link
Member

@mcollina mcollina left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should throw if both swagger and openapi options are both set at the same time.

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@climba03003
Copy link
Member Author

climba03003 commented Jan 18, 2021

I think we should throw if both swagger and openapi options are both set at the same time.

I think someone will left the swagger option there as backup and see the stability of the latest rollout of openapi support. Maybe I should add a warning instead of an error to notify the user swagger option will be ignored?

Copy link
Member

@mcollina mcollina left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@Eomm Eomm self-assigned this Jan 19, 2021
Copy link
Member

@Eomm Eomm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Blocking because I need a couple of days to check the PR and I would like to review it 👍

@Eomm Eomm self-requested a review January 24, 2021 12:41
Copy link
Member

@Eomm Eomm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this feature is ok as the first step to OAS3 support

There is some issues with this usage:

Click to expand! 'use strict'

const Fastify = require('fastify')
const fastifySwagger = require('../../index')

const fastify = Fastify({ logger: true })
fastify.register(fastifySwagger, {
openapi: {
info: {
title: 'Test swagger',
description: 'testing the fastify swagger api',
version: '0.1.0'
},
servers: [{
url: 'http://localhost'
}],
components: {
securitySchemes: {
apiKey: {
type: 'apiKey',
name: 'apiKey',
in: 'header'
}
}
}
},
exposeRoute: true
})

fastify.addSchema({
$id: 'Order',
type: 'object',
properties: {
id: {
type: 'integer'
// format: 'int64'
}
}
})

fastify.post('/', {
schema: {
body: {
$ref: 'Order#'
},
response: {
200: {
$ref: 'Order#'
}
}
}
}, () => {})

fastify.listen(8080, err => {
console.log(err)
})

That lead to:

image

Because one big difference between oas2 and oas3 is the components over the old definitions keyword. (I use this schema as reference)

So I would land this PR as a major preview release to collect other edges cases before a major bump.

What do you think? @fastify/plugins

@climba03003
Copy link
Member Author

climba03003 commented Jan 25, 2021

I think this feature is ok as the first step to OAS3 support

There is some issues with this usage:
Click to expand!
'use strict' const Fastify = require('fastify') const fastifySwagger = require('../../index') const fastify = Fastify({ logger: true }) fastify.register(fastifySwagger, { openapi: { info: { title: 'Test swagger', description: 'testing the fastify swagger api', version: '0.1.0' }, servers: [{ url: 'http://localhost' }], components: { securitySchemes: { apiKey: { type: 'apiKey', name: 'apiKey', in: 'header' } } } }, exposeRoute: true }) fastify.addSchema({ $id: 'Order', type: 'object', properties: { id: { type: 'integer' // format: 'int64' } } }) fastify.post('/', { schema: { body: { $ref: 'Order#' }, response: { 200: { $ref: 'Order#' } } } }, () => {})

fastify.listen(8080, err => { console.log(err) })

That lead to:

image

Because one big difference between oas2 and oas3 is the components over the old definitions keyword. (I use this schema as reference)

So I would land this PR as a major preview release to collect other edges cases before a major bump.

What do you think? @fastify/plugins

I think it is the bug from addHook, it should be exist even for swagger. The main reason is that we never collect the schema from addSchema on root instance.

Test Case for your reproduction

test('collect addSchema on root instance', t => {
  t.plan(2)
  const fastify = Fastify()

  fastify.register(fastifySwagger, swaggerInfo)
  fastify.addSchema({ $id: 'Order', type: 'object', properties: { id: { type: 'integer' } } })
  fastify.post('/', { schema: { body: { $ref: 'Order#' }, response: { 200: { $ref: 'Order#' } } } }, () => {})

  fastify.ready(err => {
    t.error(err)

    const swaggerObject = fastify.swagger()
    t.ok(swaggerObject.definitions['def-0'])
  })
})

Reason behind

fastify.addHook('onRoute', (routeOptions) => {
  routes.push(routeOptions)
})

fastify.addHook('onRegister', async (instance) => {
  instance.addHook('onReady', (done) => {
    const allSchemas = instance.getSchemas()  // we only collected the encapsulate schema
    for (const schemaId of Object.keys(allSchemas)) {
      if (!sharedSchemasMap.has(schemaId)) {
        sharedSchemasMap.set(schemaId, allSchemas[schemaId])
      }
    }
    done()
  })
})

Another problem like you say, the definitions should change into components/schemas

Copy link
Member

@Eomm Eomm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it should be exist even for swagger.

Nope, it is managed by the (ugly sigh) def-0 of the json-schema-resolver and it could be fixed there:
https://github.com/Eomm/json-schema-resolver/blob/39191491f3ef2c4b5fac5e19ad067459ccccdded/ref-resolver.js#L24
but your hotfix works 👍

@climba03003
Copy link
Member Author

climba03003 commented Jan 26, 2021

it should be exist even for swagger.

Nope, it is managed by the (ugly sigh) def-0 of the json-schema-resolver and it could be fixed there:
https://github.com/Eomm/json-schema-resolver/blob/39191491f3ef2c4b5fac5e19ad067459ccccdded/ref-resolver.js#L24
but your hotfix works 👍

I do not think it can be solved like you say as the #/definitions is hard coded in here:
https://github.com/Eomm/json-schema-resolver/blob/39191491f3ef2c4b5fac5e19ad067459ccccdded/ref-resolver.js#L113

What I said it exist for swagger is that, your example addSchema is on the root instance which we do not collect the schema currently and json-schema-resolver cannot resolve schema from an empty object. You can check my newly added test in here:

fastify.register(function (instance, _, done) {
instance.addSchema({ $id: 'Order', type: 'object', properties: { id: { type: 'integer' } } })
instance.post('/', { schema: { body: { $ref: 'Order#' }, response: { 200: { $ref: 'Order#' } } } }, () => {})
done()
})

I need to wrap the addSchema in register in order to get the test work.
It should be a bug needed to file, so I will not fix it now.

@SkeLLLa
Copy link
Contributor

SkeLLLa commented Jan 26, 2021

For schemas there's slightly different approach that might be more elegant solution rather than resolve it. I've described it here: SkeLLLa/fastify-oas#30 (comment) but it require lot's of work, so it should be different PR.

@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
import { FastifyPlugin } from 'fastify';
import { FastifyPluginCallback } from 'fastify';
import { OpenAPI, OpenAPIV2, OpenAPIV3 } from 'openapi-types';
Copy link
Contributor

@danez danez Jan 27, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Because of this openapi-types needs to be a dependency and not dev-dependency.
See #340

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actually, it is landed from here #328

Copy link
Contributor

@danez danez Jan 28, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

But this pr was landed after #328 (if i see that correctly here). So on master index.d.ts has a dependency on openapi-types, but it does not list it as dependency.

Copy link
Member Author

@climba03003 climba03003 Jan 29, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This PR is merging the #328 by fast-forwarding commit. The actual PR that add the openapi-types for devDeps is #328
4.0.0 indeed is merging two PR. #328 and #333, you can check the commit history in here to see the detail.
image

Copy link
Member Author

@climba03003 climba03003 Jan 29, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let say in this way, even without this PR, #328 will cause the same problem. If the problem is adding openapi-types as devDeps. It is added in #328. Not arguing anything, I just want to figure out which is the root cause.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
9 participants