Skip to content

Add Support for An Open API Specification to be Associated with an Entity #50

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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 13, 2025

Conversation

brianhyder
Copy link
Contributor

Context:
The pull request is intended to allow users of the TF provider to have a resource that will allow for associating an Open API Specification (OAS) with a given entity outside of the existing "links" functionality provided with the catalog_entity resource.

The reasoning:

  1. In some cases, OAS documents are templated and only the fully rendered version is available build or deploy time and is not committed back to the repository. Therefore, the links functionality does not work well.
  2. Separating the ability to associate the OAS back to an entity as a separate resource allows for companies to separate the responsibility of setting up the entity and the creation of the OAS document. In our case, the entity creation is handled by our dev-ops teams while the OAS file is created by the engineering team responsible for the entity/service.
  • Unit tests created & ran
  • Documentation generated
  • Manual testing performed locally with the provider against a cortex instance
  • Successful run of acceptance test make target. I can't run them against our 1 instance. I was hoping you all could run them against your test instance and provide feedback.

@nikhilunni nikhilunni requested review from shawnburke and maddymanu May 1, 2025 15:21
Copy link

@shawnburke shawnburke left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yep looks good thanks!

@nikhilunni nikhilunni merged commit 8ce3edf into cortexapps:main May 13, 2025
3 checks passed
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