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

Request change: the example in the main README.md file is not clear #21

Closed
OmarThinks opened this issue Jan 29, 2021 · 3 comments · Fixed by #23
Closed

Request change: the example in the main README.md file is not clear #21

OmarThinks opened this issue Jan 29, 2021 · 3 comments · Fixed by #23

Comments

@OmarThinks
Copy link
Contributor

OmarThinks commented Jan 29, 2021

Before I start, I really thank you so much for this package.


I request to make a change:
The example at the README.md file in the main page of the package is not clear.
At first, I thought that the package was not working correctly.
I kept working, and sending requests till finally worked after about 15 minutes of trying.


For this reason:
The example is very advanced, and for someone who wanna learn the package for the first time, the learning curve of the example is very hard to learn.
This is dangerous for someone who wants to learn about the package for the first time.


So I would like to solve this problem by doing this.
Create 3 separate endpoints:

  1. To read the GET request only, and above it the pydantic class of it.
  2. To read the JSON request body only, and above it the pydantic class of it.
  3. To read both the JSON request and the GET request together, using the old pydantic classes.

If God willed, I can make this change.
I will make these changes, If you give the permission.
Thank you!

@bauerji
Copy link
Owner

bauerji commented Jan 29, 2021

Hello Omar,

feel free to modify README to give it more clarity and submit a PR. Any contribution is welcome!

Jirka

@OmarThinks
Copy link
Contributor Author

Okay.
If God willed, I will do my best.
Thank you so much for giving me this opportunity.
👍 💯 🥇

@bauerji bauerji linked a pull request Jan 31, 2021 that will close this issue
@bauerji
Copy link
Owner

bauerji commented Jan 31, 2021

released in version 0.6.0

@bauerji bauerji closed this as completed Jan 31, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants