-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
writeOnly fields are not marked as such in the generated DTO #136
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
Closed
davidjohnstonverint opened this issue
Dec 21, 2021
· 1 comment
· Fixed by openapi-processor/openapi-processor-core#83
Closed
writeOnly fields are not marked as such in the generated DTO #136
davidjohnstonverint opened this issue
Dec 21, 2021
· 1 comment
· Fixed by openapi-processor/openapi-processor-core#83
Labels
enhancement
New feature or request
Milestone
Comments
This should be easy to implement, looking at it. Thanks for the feedback. :-) |
hauner
added a commit
to openapi-processor/openapi-processor-core
that referenced
this issue
Dec 23, 2021
hauner
added a commit
to openapi-processor/openapi-processor-core
that referenced
this issue
Dec 23, 2021
hauner
added a commit
to openapi-processor/openapi-processor-core
that referenced
this issue
Dec 23, 2021
hauner
added a commit
to openapi-processor/openapi-processor-core
that referenced
this issue
Dec 23, 2021
hauner
added a commit
to openapi-processor/openapi-processor-core
that referenced
this issue
Dec 23, 2021
hauner
added a commit
to openapi-processor/openapi-processor-core
that referenced
this issue
Dec 23, 2021
hauner
added a commit
to openapi-processor/openapi-processor-core
that referenced
this issue
Dec 23, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
If I mark a field in the open API spec as writeOnly: true, e.g. as you might do for a password/token:
The generated DTO class does not mark the field as write only. Ideally it would mark the field on the DTO with JsonProperty.Access.WRITE_ONLY in the @JsonProperty annotation
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: