Path to GitHub client

[augustuswm]

Currently the octorust client is generated out of the third-part-api-clients repo against an outdated GitHub spec. Ideally progenitor could be used to generate this client against the current live spec instead. This is a tracking issue to track the list of known features needed to make this possible. See the individual tickets for more details.

For reference this list was compiled against: https://github.com/github/rest-api-description/blob/main/descriptions/api.github.com/api.github.com.json

• Add text/x-markdown as a supported request body type
• Handle default not present in the list of enum values #396
• Multiple response types not supported #344
• Handle enum values that contain meaningful non-alphanumeric characters #397
• Duplicate structs generated from key / title collision (consider type naming typify#1 and Nullable compont generates recursive type #398)
• Nullable compont generates recursive type #398
• Support for array / object parameters #268
• Support for servers parameter
• Solution for access / refresh token handling

[geoffreygarrett]

@augustuswm & @ahl, which of the above tasks relate to the following:

--- stdout
cargo:rerun-if-changed=./api.github.com.json
--- stderr
thread 'main' panicked at progenitor-github/build.rs:10:50:
called `Result::unwrap()` on an `Err` value: Error("data did not match any variant of untagged enum ReferenceOr", line: 65608, column: 3)

(?)

I could only find #348. If desired my setup is as available in the zip in the PR demo #857.

EDIT:

Seems to be the lack of support for JSON schema types in OpenAPI deserialisation.

 "type": ["string", "null"],

I guess I'll just parse it to the nullable syntax in OpenAPI for now.

[ahl]

Seems to be the lack of support for JSON schema types in OpenAPI deserialisation.

Yeah, that works in 3.1, but not in 3.0.x. Progenitor will support 3.1 at some point, but 1. there aren't that many 3.1 docs out there and 2. I have a stack of work I want to do in order to "propertly" support it

[geoffreygarrett]

@ahl I'm not sure if the project is open to PRs etc. or if development will continue, but there's this I was hoping might get a review #857.

[geoffreygarrett]

🦗