You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Initial vision was to have different openapi generated java sdk such as metal-java, fabric-java etc and eventually merge them into one equinix-java SDK. Which would share API client and other supporting files hence ideally Supporting files such as api client for fabric should be generated in com.equinix.openapi.
But in our case API client generated for fabric differs from metal due to shift in supported authorization model. Hence we need to maintain two different API clients. These leads to the realisation that even though they are in different project if API clients and supporting files are generated under com.equinix.openapi namespace then there will be a conflict during importing API client when both SDKs are consumed together.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
A common APIClient would open cleaner possibilities for a unified Equinix API(s) Java package. We may be able to do that with Fabric and other services (everything else) that use OAuth Bearer tokens. Metal is the stand-out here. Perhaps we should put the Metal API client behind the added namespace instead of Fabric.
APIs, Models and supporting files are created in following namespace for :
Metal :
ref : https://github.com/equinix-labs/metal-java/blob/main/spec/oas3.config.json
Fabric :
ref : https://github.com/equinix-labs/fabric-java/blob/main/spec/oas3.fabric.config.json
Initial vision was to have different openapi generated java sdk such as metal-java, fabric-java etc and eventually merge them into one equinix-java SDK. Which would share API client and other supporting files hence ideally Supporting files such as api client for fabric should be generated in com.equinix.openapi.
But in our case API client generated for fabric differs from metal due to shift in supported authorization model. Hence we need to maintain two different API clients. These leads to the realisation that even though they are in different project if API clients and supporting files are generated under com.equinix.openapi namespace then there will be a conflict during importing API client when both SDKs are consumed together.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: