API 응답 스키마 수정, Comment와 Ticket 공통 스키마 추가 #15
Conversation
components/schemas 섹션에 Comment와 Ticket 스키마를 추가 API 응답 스키마에서 해당 Comment와 Ticket 스키마를 사용하도록 수정
tickets api info 설명 개선
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hello @nakyeonko3, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
Summary of Changes
This pull request focuses on refining the API response schema for the Tickets API. I've modified the openapi.yaml file to introduce common schemas for Comment and Ticket objects. This change aims to improve consistency and reusability across different API endpoints. Additionally, I've enhanced the description of the tickets API to provide more clarity on its functionality.
Highlights
- Schema Refactoring: Introduced common schemas for
CommentandTicketinopenapi.yamlto promote consistency and avoid redundancy in API responses. - API Description Enhancement: Improved the description of the Tickets API in
openapi.yamlto offer a clearer understanding of its purpose and capabilities. - Response Schema Updates: Updated various API response schemas to reference the newly defined
TicketandCommentschemas, ensuring a standardized structure.
Changelog
Click here to see the changelog
- tickets/openapi.yaml
- Added a detailed description for the Tickets API, clarifying its purpose and functionalities (lines 4-9).
- Replaced inline object definitions for ticket items in the
/ticketsendpoint with a reference to theTicketschema (line 34). - Replaced inline object definitions for the response schema of the POST
/ticketsendpoint with a reference to theTicketschema (line 87). - Replaced inline object definitions for the response schema of the GET
/tickets/{ticket_id}endpoint with a reference to theTicketschema (line 117). - Replaced inline object definitions for the response schema of the PUT
/tickets/{ticket_id}endpoint with a reference to theTicketschema (line 159). - Replaced inline object definitions for the response schema of the DELETE
/tickets/{ticket_id}endpoint with a reference to theTicketschema (line 188). - Modified the GET
/tickets/{ticket_id}/commentsendpoint to return an array ofCommentschema references (line 231). - Replaced inline object definitions for the response schema of the POST
/tickets/{ticket_id}/commentsendpoint with a reference to theCommentschema (line 271). - Replaced inline object definitions for the response schema of the DELETE
/tickets/{ticket_id}/comments/{comment_id}endpoint with a reference to theCommentschema (line 305). - Defined the
Commentschema with properties foridandcontent(lines 313-321). - Defined the
Ticketschema with properties forid,title,description,status, andcomments, withcommentsbeing an array ofCommentschema references (lines 323-342).
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
| Feature | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
| Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
| Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
| Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Schemas defined with care,
API responses, beyond compare,
A standard to hold,
A story unfolds,
Consistency floating in the air.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
Walkthrough이번 변경사항은 Tickets API 문서를 개선하는 작업입니다. Changes
Possibly related PRs
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🔇 Additional comments (10)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
The pull request introduces modifications to the API response schema and incorporates a common schema for Comments and Tickets. Additionally, it enhances the descriptions for the tickets API. The changes appear well-structured and contribute to improved API clarity and maintainability.
Merge Readiness
The code changes look good and improve the API definition. I am unable to directly approve the pull request, and users should have others review and approve this code before merging. I recommend merging this pull request.
2 participants
개선된 부분
Summary by CodeRabbit