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

Swagger/OpenAPI mismatch with returned data for DeviceInterface.ConnectedEndpoint #4808

Closed
clienthax opened this issue Jul 1, 2020 · 6 comments
Labels
pending closure Requires immediate attention to avoid being closed for inactivity status: needs owner This issue is tentatively accepted pending a volunteer committed to its implementation type: bug A confirmed report of unexpected behavior in the application

Comments

@clienthax
Copy link

clienthax commented Jul 1, 2020

Environment

  • Python version: netbox-docker
  • NetBox version: 2.8.6

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Generate go-netbox with latest swagger https://github.com/netbox-community/go-netbox
  2. Create 2x device with network cable connection between them
  3. Query for data with Dcim.DcimInterfacesRead

Expected Behavior

Swagger to match returned data.

Observed Behavior

error: json: cannot unmarshal number into Go struct field DeviceInterface.connected_endpoint of type string

It seems this is defined in OAS/swagger as a map[string]string instead of a structure.

clienthax added a commit to clienthax/go-netbox that referenced this issue Jul 1, 2020
@jeremystretch jeremystretch added status: needs owner This issue is tentatively accepted pending a volunteer committed to its implementation type: bug A confirmed report of unexpected behavior in the application labels Jul 1, 2020
@jeremystretch
Copy link
Member

@clienthax Since this is the third such issue you've opened recently (in addition to #4803 and #4804), I'm going to ask you to volunteer to take on at least one of them.

@clienthax
Copy link
Author

clienthax commented Jul 1, 2020

@jeremystretch If i knew how to resolve the issues in Netbox itself I would of done that instead of opening issue reports.
I am not against helping with projects when I am aware of how they function, that is not the case here, I have near 0 python experience and the same for Django/Swagger apart from using the generated library, I have no idea why this is 'broken' or what would need to be done to resolve it on this end.

@jeremystretch
Copy link
Member

We make a reasonable effort to ensure the automatically generated OpenAPI spec is accurate. However, supporting the ability to dynamically generate a full client based on the spec is not a design goal, so this sort of "bug" is not going to get a lot of attention from the core maintainers. So, if this is something you need from the project, I encourage you to commit the time and effort to own the issues you've opened. Otherwise, unless someone else volunteers to own the work, it's likely not going to get addressed and the issue will be automatically closed after a few weeks of inactivity.

@dgjustice
Copy link

That's a reasonable approach. At its core, this and pynetbox are where the lion's share of activity and usage occur. The generated client code in go-netbox gets us most of the way to where we want to be. Some hand-massaging of the golang repo between releases shouldn't be a massive problem.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jul 16, 2020

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Please see our contributing guide.

@stale stale bot added the pending closure Requires immediate attention to avoid being closed for inactivity label Jul 16, 2020
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jul 24, 2020

This issue has been automatically closed due to lack of activity. In an effort to reduce noise, please do not comment any further. Note that the core maintainers may elect to reopen this issue at a later date if deemed necessary.

@stale stale bot closed this as completed Jul 24, 2020
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 5, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
pending closure Requires immediate attention to avoid being closed for inactivity status: needs owner This issue is tentatively accepted pending a volunteer committed to its implementation type: bug A confirmed report of unexpected behavior in the application
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants