Skip to content

Clarification on Path Item Servers #3248

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Closed
charjr opened this issue Apr 15, 2023 · 5 comments
Closed

Clarification on Path Item Servers #3248

charjr opened this issue Apr 15, 2023 · 5 comments
Labels
clarification requests to clarify, but not change, part of the spec re-use: globals/defaults Default or global components that can be overridden in some way
Milestone
v3.0.4

Comments

@charjr
Copy link
Contributor

charjr commented Apr 15, 2023 •
edited
Loading

If "servers" are specified at the Path Item level, do they override Root level servers?

On an Operation Object it is explicitly stated that:
"If an alternative server object is specified at the Path Item Object or Root level, it will be overridden by this value."

Do Path Item servers override Root level servers in the same manner? If not I assume it must add to the list of available servers (for that path only).

I would request that the PathItem servers Description be more explicit on whether it overrides, or adds to the Root level servers.

I'd be happy to put in a PR for this if I know what the correct behaviour is.
@MikeRalphson
Copy link
Member

MikeRalphson commented Apr 16, 2023 •
edited
Loading

They do.

An alternative server array to service all operations in this path.

I can see it would be beneficial to have the language in both places tidied up for consistency.

A PR for review would be great, thanks!

It could go against the v3.0.4-dev branch, and we could forward-port it to 3.1.1

@charjr charjr mentioned this issue Apr 16, 2023
Merged
@handrews
Copy link
Member

@charjr are you adding this to 3.0.4 as well? This should stay open until it is merged in both branches.

@charjr charjr mentioned this issue Apr 27, 2023
Merged
@charjr
Copy link
Contributor Author

charjr commented Apr 27, 2023

@handrews Apologies, I misunderstood the initial request and pushed it straight to 3.1.1.

Here you go #3259

@handrews
Copy link
Member

@charjr no worries, it also goes in 3.1.1!

@char0n char0n mentioned this issue Nov 2, 2023
Closed
@charjr
Copy link
Contributor Author

charjr commented Dec 22, 2023

This has now been merged into 3.0.4 and 3.1.1

@charjr charjr closed this as completed Dec 22, 2023
@handrews handrews modified the milestones: v3.1.1, v3.0.4 Jan 27, 2024
@handrews handrews added clarification requests to clarify, but not change, part of the spec re-use: globals/defaults Default or global components that can be overridden in some way labels May 17, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
clarification requests to clarify, but not change, part of the spec re-use: globals/defaults Default or global components that can be overridden in some way
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v3.0.4
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@MikeRalphson @handrews @charjr