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

Repo headline & gem description claim to test query parameters (it doesn't) #91

Open
amcaplan opened this issue Jul 21, 2016 · 1 comment

Comments

@amcaplan
Copy link
Contributor

This repo bills itself as:

Tests your rails API against its Swagger description of end-points, models, and query parameters.

But in the README, it says:

Parameters in the query string are not validated or processed by Apivore in any way.

which is actually the behavior.

I would find it very useful to verify the query parameters, but in the meantime, the repo headline shouldn't claim it does something it doesn't.

@philsturgeon
Copy link

philsturgeon commented Nov 20, 2017

Swinging by to say: yep, I read the description and was very confused to then read the disclaimer.

This looks like a great tool, thanks for releasing it, but its use is diminished greatly by not caring about query string parameters. I'm mostly using JSON Schema as a basis for my OpenAPI docs (yeah i know they're a bit different, long story) and I can use thoughtbot/json_matchers to confirm the responses.

I was hoping Apivore would be a ruby-based in-RSpec version of Dredd, which takes example values from the query string params listed in the spec. This is amazing as it confirms that your documented query string param values are actually valid, (or just proves that your API accepts whatever you documented without erring at least 😓).

If Apivore is ignoring query string parameters then it's just a replacement for JSON Matchers, which is ok, but means you should probably change the description a bit.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants