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

refactor: switch to upstream openapi #195

Closed
wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

skyd0me
Copy link
Contributor

@skyd0me skyd0me commented Sep 25, 2024

unleash proxy is still using https://github.com/Unleash/express-openapi, which is the forked and archived version of https://github.com/wesleytodd/express-openapi

As all required changes are already pushed to the upstream project, we can migrate to the upstream project.
This was already done for the unleash server (see Unleash/unleash#5259) a while back but not for unleash proxy.

It also updates the lib to the latest version so that security patches can be applied (which we need to do very soon due to path-to-regexp etc.). See https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/pull/8170/files

tsconfig.json Outdated
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
// "isolatedModules": true, /* Transpile each file as a separate module (similar to 'ts.transpileModule'). */

/* Strict Type-Checking Options */
"strict": true, /* Enable all strict type-checking options. */
// "strict": true, /* Enable all strict type-checking options. */

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what is the reason to switch this config off?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

the main reason was the lack of types for the lib. But I adjusted the type definitions we already had

Copy link
Contributor

@chriswk chriswk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please readd the strict type-checking.

@chriswk
Copy link
Contributor

chriswk commented Oct 2, 2024

Hi @skyd0me - I appreciate this contribution, we've now done it ourselves with #197, will make sure to credit you.

@chriswk chriswk closed this Oct 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants