Frans, I don't think any of us have used swagger, only seen and admired its output.
-joe On Oct 25, 2011, at 4:41 PM, Frans Thamura <fr...@meruvian.org> wrote: > we are working to use swagger, but i think the s/w is not working > > can help? > > F > > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 3:24 AM, Anne Gentle <a...@openstack.org> wrote: >> Hi all - >> >> Would also love Swagger. Nati looked into it and he thought it would require >> a Python client generator, based on reading that "Client generators are >> currently available for Scala, Java, Javascript, Ruby, PHP, and Actionscript >> 3." So in the meantime the QA list and Nati suggested WADL as a starting >> point for auto-generating simple API documentation while also looking >> towards Swagger for a way to document a public cloud like the Free Cloud. At >> the last OpenStack hackathon in the Bay Area (California), Nati worked >> through a simple WADL reader, he may be able to describe it better. >> >> Hope that helps - sorry it's not more detailed than that but wanted to give >> some background, sounds like we all want similar outcomes and the resources >> for tasks to get us to outcomes is all we're lacking. QA Team, let me know >> how the Docs Team can work with you here. >> >> Anne >> Anne Gentle >> a...@openstack.org >> my blog | my book | LinkedIn | Delicious | Twitter >> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Joseph Heck <he...@mac.com> wrote: >>> >>> I expect this is going to open a nasty can of worms... today we don't have >>> a consistent way of describing the APIs for the various services. I saw >>> Nati's bug (https://launchpad.net/bugs/881621), which implies that all the >>> services should have a WADL somewhere describing the API. >>> >>> I'm not a huge fan of WADL, but the only other thing I've found is swagger >>> (http://swagger.wordnik.com/spec). I have been working towards trying to >>> create an comprehensive OpenStack API documentation set that can be >>> published as HTML, not unlike some of these: >>> >>> https://dev.twitter.com/docs/api >>> http://developer.netflix.com/docs/REST_API_Reference >>> http://code.google.com/p/bitly-api/wiki/ApiDocumentation#REST_API >>> http://upcoming.yahoo.com/services/api/ >>> >>> To make this sort of web-page documentation effective, I think it's best >>> to drive it from descriptions on each of the projects (if we can). I've >>> checked with some friends who've done similar, and learned that most of the >>> those API doc sets are maintained by hand - not generated from description >>> files. >>> >>> What do you all think about standardizing on WADL (or swagger) as a >>> description of the API and generating comprehensive web-site-based API >>> documentation from those description files? Does anyone have any other >>> description formats that would work for this as an alternative? >>> >>> (I admit I don't want to get into XML parsing hell, which is what it >>> appears that WADL might lead too) >>> >>> -joe >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack >>> Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net >>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack >>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack >> Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >> _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
