Definition for java.time.Instant as String??

2017-05-26 Thread Dan Tran
Hi By default swagger-maven-plugin generates the below block for java.time.Instant "xxxName" : { "type" : "integer", "format" : "int64" }, However, my actual payload is a ISO8601 format using internal custom serializer with Jackson ObjectMapper. Therefor

Re: NPE at io.swagger.jackson.ModelResolver.handleUnwrapped()

2017-05-26 Thread Dan Tran
Further investigation shows that swagger-m-p 3.1.4 + swagger-core-1.5.10 works. Its debug logs also show springframework.hateoas.Resource does get processed however, with swagger-core-1.5.11 which also introducing @JsonUnwrapped handling, this is where NPE shows up I wonder of any one abl

Re: Parents in Television

2017-05-26 Thread Topher Eliot
This posting is wildly off topic here. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Swagger" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to swagger-swaggersocket+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit ht

How to keep user authenticated between page refreshes

2017-05-26 Thread Jules Willing
Hi, I'm trying to find out how to modify the Swagger UI page so that the user does not need to click the Authorize button each time the page is refreshed. (I'm using oAuth2.0 authentication method) I've spent a few hours inspecting the code and searching Google, but unfortunately I'm not a bac

Re: NPE at io.swagger.jackson.ModelResolver.handleUnwrapped()

2017-05-26 Thread Dan Tran
swagger-3.1.4 + swagger-model-1.5.9 work, and it does not scan Spring Hateoas. Is there a option with swagger-core-1.5.12+ to do the same? Thanks -Dan On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 12:23:30 AM UTC-7, Dan Tran wrote: > > Ah, now we toasted. > > swagger-m-p-3.1.3 which uses swagger-core 1.5.5 st

Re: NPE at io.swagger.jackson.ModelResolver.handleUnwrapped()

2017-05-26 Thread Dan Tran
Ah, now we toasted. swagger-m-p-3.1.3 which uses swagger-core 1.5.5 still working for us with limitation. :( On Thursday, May 25, 2017 at 10:39:20 PM UTC-7, tony tam wrote: > > Yes, likely it’s trying to build a schema of that model, and it doesn’t > like it. Not sure what one would ex