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

[Meta] Improvements to the API #64

Closed
bkcsoft opened this issue Nov 4, 2016 · 22 comments
Closed

[Meta] Improvements to the API #64

bkcsoft opened this issue Nov 4, 2016 · 22 comments
Labels
modifies/api This PR adds API routes or modifies them type/proposal The new feature has not been accepted yet but needs to be discussed first. type/summary This issue aggregates a bunch of other issues

Comments

@bkcsoft
Copy link
Member

bkcsoft commented Nov 4, 2016

Meta-issue for everything API related. Please don't close until API is done, and don't set a milestone either since it's long-running :trollface:

Original Gogs-issue

Related Issues:

Not APIs but related:

Will add more to this list as they keep coming.

This also requires us to fork gogits/go-gogs-client done 😄


Want to back this issue? Post a bounty on it! We accept bounties via Bountysource.

@bkcsoft bkcsoft added the type/enhancement An improvement of existing functionality label Nov 4, 2016
@bkcsoft
Copy link
Member Author

bkcsoft commented Nov 4, 2016

@tboerger Should this be a "Project" instead maybe?

@bkcsoft bkcsoft changed the title [Meta] Improvments to the API [Meta] Improvements to the API Nov 4, 2016
@hhenkel
Copy link
Contributor

hhenkel commented Nov 4, 2016

One point I already mentioned on the gitter channel yesterday, IMHO there is a need for automatic documentation (from code / comments in the code) of the api. I think this should be added to this list, there is an initial issue in go-gogs-client mentioning one of the current issues with the docs: gogs/go-gogs-client#46

It seems swagger is the most popular solution currently and it seems there is a go implementation

@metalmatze
Copy link
Contributor

Yep 👍 for swagger

@tboerger
Copy link
Member

tboerger commented Nov 4, 2016

Maybe a project should be better to keep an overview of missing parts.

@bkcsoft
Copy link
Member Author

bkcsoft commented Nov 4, 2016

@tboerger AFAIK it's hard to make generic comments (like @hhenkel just did) on a Project?

@tboerger
Copy link
Member

tboerger commented Nov 4, 2016

We should create issues for all of that.

@lunny lunny added this to the 1.1.0 milestone Nov 9, 2016
@lunny lunny added type/proposal The new feature has not been accepted yet but needs to be discussed first. type/feature Completely new functionality. Can only be merged if feature freeze is not active. labels Nov 9, 2016
@lunny
Copy link
Member

lunny commented Nov 9, 2016

I think this should be the emphasis of v1.1. So we have to list all the APIs should github have. And implements it one by one. For example, we can implement https://developer.github.com/v3/repos/statuses first?

@bkcsoft
Copy link
Member Author

bkcsoft commented Nov 10, 2016

@lunny I have a few PRs coming, but I'll continue with the rest of the API after that starting with Status API :)

@lunny
Copy link
Member

lunny commented Nov 10, 2016

+1

@pyhedgehog
Copy link

Please add API for POST /api/v1/repos/:owner/:repo/forks. It's very important feature.

@bkcsoft
Copy link
Member Author

bkcsoft commented Dec 25, 2016

@pyhedgehog Please make an issue for that, since this is just a Meta-issue for tracking API-changes 🙂

@pyhedgehog
Copy link

pyhedgehog commented Dec 25, 2016

@bkcsoft, #477 + #494.

@bkcsoft bkcsoft mentioned this issue Jan 6, 2017
3 tasks
@lunny lunny modified the milestones: 1.2.0, 1.1.0 Jan 25, 2017
@bkcsoft bkcsoft removed this from the 1.2.0 milestone Jan 29, 2017
@bkcsoft
Copy link
Member Author

bkcsoft commented Jan 29, 2017

@lunny

and don't set a milestone either since it's long-running

:trollface:

@lunny
Copy link
Member

lunny commented Jan 30, 2017

OK

@tboerger
Copy link
Member

But since it will be done within the 1.x.x livetime I will set it to 1.x.x milestone :trollface:

@tboerger tboerger added this to the 1.x.x milestone Feb 10, 2017
@bkcsoft
Copy link
Member Author

bkcsoft commented Feb 12, 2017

:trollface: (GitHub needs more reactions! )

@lunny
Copy link
Member

lunny commented Dec 31, 2017

@bkcsoft I updated the issue, seems almost done. 😄

@stevegt
Copy link
Contributor

stevegt commented May 5, 2018

Mentioning #3076 (add github compatible v3 routes) here for searchability.

lunny pushed a commit to lunny/gitea that referenced this issue Feb 7, 2019
@Serkan-devel
Copy link

Will the GraphQL-API be supported?

@lunny
Copy link
Member

lunny commented Mar 25, 2019

There is an issue to report that.

@lunny lunny added type/summary This issue aggregates a bunch of other issues and removed type/enhancement An improvement of existing functionality type/feature Completely new functionality. Can only be merged if feature freeze is not active. labels Oct 15, 2020
@6543 6543 added the modifies/api This PR adds API routes or modifies them label Nov 24, 2020
@6543
Copy link
Member

6543 commented Nov 24, 2020

beside api unrelated & feed API, everything is here.

should we close this now?

@6543
Copy link
Member

6543 commented Nov 24, 2020

ok since https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Akind%2Fapi+label%3Akind%2Fproposal

summary it well, I'll close this now - if there is a need for a summary issue on API stuff, just ask and I'll open a new one :)

@6543 6543 closed this as completed Nov 24, 2020
@lafriks lafriks removed this from the 1.x.x milestone Dec 5, 2020
@go-gitea go-gitea locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 18, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
modifies/api This PR adds API routes or modifies them type/proposal The new feature has not been accepted yet but needs to be discussed first. type/summary This issue aggregates a bunch of other issues
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

10 participants