regex to support alt application/*json types

[darduf]

In relation to this issue - where schema tester was failing with an UndocumentedSchemaSectionError on our OAS defintitions that had application/vnd.api+json content types.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #284 (73b7fb7) into master (1929ad3) will decrease coverage by 0.1%.
The diff coverage is 85.7%.

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           master    #284     +/-   ##
========================================
- Coverage    98.7%   98.5%   -0.2%     
========================================
  Files           7       7             
  Lines         474     480      +6     
  Branches       77      80      +3     
========================================
+ Hits          468     473      +5     
  Misses          4       4             
- Partials        2       3      +1     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
openapi_tester/schema_tester.py	99.3% <85.7%> (-0.7%)	⬇️

[sondrelg]

Would you mind adding a test for this, to ensure no one accidentally breaks it in the future?

And just have one quick question about the logic 🙂

[sondrelg]

Why are we iterating over key in schema.keys() here instead of just doing this?

if compiled_pattern.match(key):
    return schema[key_]

[darduf]

This is to find a str match in the schema list.
For example schema.keys() in one instance has dict_keys(['application/xml', 'application/json']) and in this case key_ will return schema["application/json"] as opposed to schema["^application\/.*json$"] (which will break).

[darduf]

Would you mind adding a test for this, to ensure no one accidentally breaks it in the future?

Absolutely - I was trying to understand how to add a test for this and was unsure where to add a test and what additional files are needed.
I thought of adding another OAS yaml file to ../drf-openapi-tester/tests/schemas/sample-schemas with application/vnd.api+json content. Would this suffice?
Or does it need a new test function here?
I'm not 100% sure tbh how this openapi tester runs through tests for this particular case, so I would appreciate your help on adding this test. 👍

[sondrelg]

Yes you could add a new schema file, or identify a way to run the (previously) failing code directly and send in a partial schema as a dict. You should be able to test get_key_value directly and just pass a dict that contains the header.

The ideal thing, if you're comfortable with git rebasing, would be to:

• add the test first and push that as an initial commit
• let it run to completion and fail in the PR, to show that the old code was not working
• then push the fix, which fixes the broken test

But don't worry about that if you're not sure how to do it 👍

[darduf]

tests/test_django_framework.py:2:1: TC002 Move third-party import 'rest_framework.response.Response' into a type-checking block

To avoid this, I tried moving the import under this TYPE_CHECKING conditional as suggested.

File:./drf-openapi-tester/test_project/api/views/pets.py
08: if TYPE_CHECKING:
09:     from rest_framework.request import Request
10:     from rest_framework.response import Response

But this didn't fix, and then suggested I move it out of this block :) ?

Hopefully, we can get this PR with updated tests through soon 👍

[sondrelg]

This looks good @darduf, let's try it out 👍 I'll fix the linting error

[darduf]

It looks like this was removed in the latest release, probably from this PR as flagged here.
Can we get this back into the release please?

[sondrelg]

Yes, sorry about that 🙇 I'm flying this evening to visit family over the weekend, so I will not be free to fix this until Monday most likely. If you want to create a new PR with a fix, I will make the time to merge and release a new version, but if not I'll try to get this done then, and look at whatever other issues/PRs are remaining

[darduf]

So create a new PR with the exact same fix as this PR?
It would be great to get this asap if possible 🙏

[darduf]

Ive created a new PR - with an initial commit showing the failing test on application/json and the foloow up commit with this fix.
If you could fast track this through I would really appreciate it 👍