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

Added flag in order to get proto names on autodoc #49

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 27, 2018

Conversation

gabrielerzinger
Copy link
Contributor

I think it would be nice for us to be able of getting high-level type information on autodoc, such as which protos were used and such, so I added a flag for doing so.

I've also added a doc route to the cluster example.

@gabrielerzinger gabrielerzinger changed the title Added flag in order to get proto names on autodoc [wip] Added flag in order to get proto names on autodoc Aug 24, 2018
@coveralls
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 476

  • 22 of 30 (73.33%) changed or added relevant lines in 4 files are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage increased (+0.2%) to 75.035%

Changes Missing Coverage Covered Lines Changed/Added Lines %
service/remote.go 0 2 0.0%
service/handler.go 0 2 0.0%
docgenerator/generator.go 19 23 82.61%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 474: 0.2%
Covered Lines: 3802
Relevant Lines: 5067

💛 - Coveralls

@gabrielerzinger gabrielerzinger changed the title [wip] Added flag in order to get proto names on autodoc Added flag in order to get proto names on autodoc Aug 27, 2018
Copy link
Contributor

@cscatolini cscatolini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@cscatolini cscatolini merged commit 313c91f into master Aug 27, 2018
@cscatolini cscatolini deleted the feature/autodoc-flag branch September 12, 2018 16:15
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 this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants