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 new channels and operations objects #264

Conversation

fmvilas
Copy link
Member

@fmvilas fmvilas commented Sep 28, 2022

Description

It adds the new operations and channels objects for version 3.0.0.

Related issue(s)

asyncapi/spec#827
asyncapi/spec#806

Copy link
Member

@derberg derberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Left few comments

definitions/3.0.0/channelMessages.json Show resolved Hide resolved
schemas/3.0.0.json Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
definitions/3.0.0/asyncapi.json Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -7,8 +7,12 @@
}
},
"properties": {
"$ref": {
"$ref": "http://asyncapi.com/definitions/3.0.0/ReferenceObject.json"
Copy link
Member

@smoya smoya Sep 30, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For the reference, this change, in combination with the changes done in definitions/3.0.0/channels.json, will solve asyncapi/spec#699 if I'm correct, please confirm @char0n

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@smoya yes I can confirm.

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Oct 4, 2022

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

No Coverage information No Coverage information
0.0% 0.0% Duplication

@fmvilas
Copy link
Member Author

fmvilas commented Oct 4, 2022

Alright, tested it on https://www.jsonschemavalidator.net/ and seems to work 👍

@smoya
Copy link
Member

smoya commented Oct 5, 2022

Alright, tested it on https://www.jsonschemavalidator.net/ and seems to work 👍

How cool would be to have this in place! asyncapi/studio#207

@fmvilas
Copy link
Member Author

fmvilas commented Oct 7, 2022

@derberg I'm confused now. Should the title say feat! or feat? 🤔

Ping @dalelane

@derberg
Copy link
Member

derberg commented Oct 10, 2022

Must be ! because last time there was no and [v3.2.0-next-major-spec.1](https://github.com/asyncapi/spec-json-schemas/releases/tag/v3.2.0-next-major-spec.1) was released instead of 4.0 RC

I only suggest that maybe we merge #248 first, and release v4, and then this PR so we have v5 RC

@derberg
Copy link
Member

derberg commented Oct 27, 2022

@fmvilas 4.0 is released, I think we can release this one.

since there is 3.2 rc1, I'm not 100% sure if we get 5.0 rc1, but from logical point of view, we should

@fmvilas
Copy link
Member Author

fmvilas commented Oct 27, 2022

Alright, let's try 🚀 😄

@fmvilas
Copy link
Member Author

fmvilas commented Oct 27, 2022

/rtm

@asyncapi-bot asyncapi-bot merged commit 69e1ce7 into asyncapi:next-major-spec Oct 27, 2022
@fmvilas fmvilas deleted the add-new-channels-and-operations-objects branch October 27, 2022 15:37
@asyncapi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

🎉 This PR is included in version 4.0.0-next-major-spec.1 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

jonaslagoni pushed a commit to jonaslagoni/spec-json-schemas that referenced this pull request Nov 6, 2022
@asyncapi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

🎉 This PR is included in version 5.0.0-next-major-spec.1 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

@asyncapi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

🎉 This PR is included in version 6.0.0-next-major-spec.1 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants