Skip to content
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

fix: swagger docs ref_name conflicts #36189

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 30, 2025

Conversation

navinkarkera
Copy link
Contributor

@navinkarkera navinkarkera commented Jan 29, 2025

Description

Fixes following error while rendering automatic swagger docs:

cms-1  | drf_yasg.errors.SwaggerGenerationError: Schema for <class 'cms.djangoapps.contentstore.rest_api.v0.serializers.authoring_grading.CourseGradingModelSerializer'> would override distinct serializer <class 'cms.djangoapps.contentstore.rest_api.v1.serializers.grading.CourseGradingModelSerializer'> because they implicitly share the same ref_name; explicitly set the ref_name attribute on both serializers' Meta classes

Supporting information

Testing instructions

Deadline

"None" if there's no rush, or provide a specific date or event (and reason) if there is one.

Other information

Include anything else that will help reviewers and consumers understand the change.

  • Does this change depend on other changes elsewhere?
  • Any special concerns or limitations? For example: deprecations, migrations, security, or accessibility.
  • If your database migration can't be rolled back easily.

@openedx-webhooks
Copy link

openedx-webhooks commented Jan 29, 2025

Thanks for the pull request, @navinkarkera!

This repository is currently maintained by @openedx/wg-maintenance-edx-platform.

Once you've gone through the following steps feel free to tag them in a comment and let them know that your changes are ready for engineering review.

🔘 Get product approval

If you haven't already, check this list to see if your contribution needs to go through the product review process.

  • If it does, you'll need to submit a product proposal for your contribution, and have it reviewed by the Product Working Group.
    • This process (including the steps you'll need to take) is documented here.
  • If it doesn't, simply proceed with the next step.

🔘 Provide context

To help your reviewers and other members of the community understand the purpose and larger context of your changes, feel free to add as much of the following information to the PR description as you can:

  • Dependencies

    This PR must be merged before / after / at the same time as ...

  • Blockers

    This PR is waiting for OEP-1234 to be accepted.

  • Timeline information

    This PR must be merged by XX date because ...

  • Partner information

    This is for a course on edx.org.

  • Supporting documentation
  • Relevant Open edX discussion forum threads

🔘 Get a green build

If one or more checks are failing, continue working on your changes until this is no longer the case and your build turns green.


Where can I find more information?

If you'd like to get more details on all aspects of the review process for open source pull requests (OSPRs), check out the following resources:

When can I expect my changes to be merged?

Our goal is to get community contributions seen and reviewed as efficiently as possible.

However, the amount of time that it takes to review and merge a PR can vary significantly based on factors such as:

  • The size and impact of the changes that it introduces
  • The need for product review
  • Maintenance status of the parent repository

💡 As a result it may take up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR.

@openedx-webhooks openedx-webhooks added the open-source-contribution PR author is not from Axim or 2U label Jan 29, 2025
@navinkarkera navinkarkera marked this pull request as ready for review January 29, 2025 04:44
@mphilbrick211 mphilbrick211 added the needs reviewer assigned PR needs to be (re-)assigned a new reviewer label Jan 29, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@pomegranited pomegranited left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍 Thank you for your thorough work here @navinkarkera !

  • I tested this by running this PR with the updated requirement from fix: errors during swagger api-docs generation openedx-learning#273 in my tutor dev stack.
    Watched the CMS logs while loading http://local.openedx.io:8001/api-docs/, and noted that all the errors and warnings that this page used to generate are now gone.
    Spot-checked a few of the modified APIs by executing them in the browser.
  • I read through the code
  • I checked for accessibility issues N/A
  • Includes documentation inline where views were excluded from the swagger API docs.
  • User-facing strings are extracted for translation N/A

@navinkarkera navinkarkera merged commit 5e51e2d into openedx:master Jan 30, 2025
49 checks passed
@openedx-webhooks openedx-webhooks removed the needs reviewer assigned PR needs to be (re-)assigned a new reviewer label Jan 30, 2025
@navinkarkera navinkarkera deleted the navin/fix-api-docs branch January 30, 2025 15:02
@edx-pipeline-bot
Copy link
Contributor

2U Release Notice: This PR has been deployed to the edX staging environment in preparation for a release to production.

@edx-pipeline-bot
Copy link
Contributor

2U Release Notice: This PR has been deployed to the edX production environment.

1 similar comment
@edx-pipeline-bot
Copy link
Contributor

2U Release Notice: This PR has been deployed to the edX production environment.

leoaulasneo98 pushed a commit to aulasneo/edx-platform that referenced this pull request Jan 30, 2025
* fix: swagger docs ref_name conflicts

* fix: swagger auto doc errors

* chore: bumps openedx-learning==0.18.2

---------

Co-authored-by: Jillian Vogel <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
open-source-contribution PR author is not from Axim or 2U
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants