readme: add main benefits (and limitations) compared to arazzo#6
Conversation
grossyoan
left a comment
grossyoan
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I just added 2 small proposals 🙏
paulRbr
force-pushed
the
add-notable-warnings
branch
from
af02c26 to
b7f41d8
Compare
|
While here, maybe we could add a link to the help page flower as soon it's ready? |
scharrier
left a comment
scharrier
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I left some small questions/feedback, but besides these one, LGTM 👍
| - Flower's **`request.body`** payloads are forced to the | ||
| `application/json` content type (while Arazzo allows for a [more | ||
| complex `requestBody` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we fix this in the data-plane before releasing this repo?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, we also need to fix the spec then
| - Flower does not support referenced workflows within a **`step`** (or | ||
| **`action`**) yet. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't understand this line, maybe it should be a bit more detailed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure I'll try to add more context.
Basically: we currently can't “use” an internal (or external) workflow inside a Flower step, where as in Arazzo you can do that:
workflows:
- workflowId: do-something-with-a-user
inputs:
properties:
user: {type: object}
# ...
- workflowId: do-something-with-me
steps:
- id: first
operationId: get-me # operation from openapi source
outputs:
user: $response.body
- id: second
workflowId: do-something-with-a-user
parameters:
- name: user
value: $steps.first.outsputs.user
Co-authored-by: Yoan Gross <32864409+grossyoan@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Polo <32060402+Polo2@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Polo <32060402+Polo2@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Sébastien Charrier <scharrier@gmail.com>
paulRbr
force-pushed
the
add-notable-warnings
branch
from
30f5ae7 to
28674f9
Compare
4 participants
No description provided.