About the Swagger feature (and an extension proposal)

Hi all, last week at ApacheCon: Core EU 2015 I attended Andrei Shakirin's talk [1] and he briefly mentioned the new Swagger feature [2]. It looked great, so I wanted to add such feature as an optional Syncope extension [3] and I've started playing with it. I noticed that Swagger's

CXF Throttling sample on Github

Hello,I was trying to use CXF throttling sample on Git https://github.com/apache/cxf/tree/master/distribution/src/main/release/samples/throttling hub for a POC.In the sample code I added

Re: About the Swagger feature (and an extension proposal)

It is already configurable, thanks. I can also move DocumentationProvider to a .model. subpackage, to avoid having references to .wadl. in Swagger features :-) Cheers, Sergey On 09/10/15 11:28, Sergey Beryozkin wrote: Yeah, I guess we just should make both options (re-grouping and enriching

RE: About the Swagger feature (and an extension proposal)

Hi Francesco and Sergey, We have discussed the topic with Sergei last days and I find Francesco proposal the most preferable at the moment. >From one side we can keep Swagger and WADL approaches not mixed. >From other side users can benefit from Swagger features even if they use WADL >first of

Re: About the Swagger feature (and an extension proposal)

I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6633 for discussion and providing PR. Regards. On 09/10/2015 12:35, Sergey Beryozkin wrote: It is already configurable, thanks. I can also move DocumentationProvider to a .model. subpackage, to avoid having references to .wadl. in

Re: @...Param and client proxy

Hi Veit FYI, the nested BeanParams work OK now Re a client proxy restriction that if you set @BeanParam on a field, setter/getter is still needed. As I mentioned - this is not needed on the server side, given that there are spec examples around of having the fields only, without method

Re: About the Swagger feature (and an extension proposal)

Hi Francesco Very nice - this is great that one can produce Swagger output without having to introduce Swagger annotations (FYI Andriy Redko worked with a Swagger team to improve Swagger JAXRS introspection). Andrei Shakirin has a good point that JAX-RS annotations can not provide the same

Re: About the Swagger feature (and an extension proposal)

Yeah, I guess we just should make both options (re-grouping and enriching with Java docs) configurable - so that it can co-exist with the endpoints which do prefer setting Swagger annotations Thanks, Sergey On 09/10/15 11:26, Sergey Beryozkin wrote: Hi Francesco Very nice - this is great

Re: About the Swagger feature (and an extension proposal)

On 09/10/2015 13:37, Andrei Shakirin wrote: Hi Francesco and Sergey, We have discussed the topic with Sergei last days and I find Francesco proposal the most preferable at the moment. From one side we can keep Swagger and WADL approaches not mixed. From other side users can benefit from