asyncapi/nodejs-ws-template

Multiple messages are not supported

jonaslagoni opened this issue · 9 comments

jonaslagoni commented

Describe the bug

The spec defines that an operation may define multiple messages, however, we always only use 1 message regardless.

How to Reproduce

Provide the following document:

{
  "asyncapi": "2.0.0",
  "info": {
    "title": "Streetlight",
    "version": "1.0.0"
  },
  "defaultContentType": "json",
  "channels": {
    "streetlight": {
      "publish": {
        "message": {
          "oneOf": [
            {
              "payload": {
                "type": "integer"
              }
            },
            {
              "payload": {
                "type": "string"
              }
            }
          ]
        }
      }
    }
  }
}

Expected behavior

Expected it to handle multiple messages.

github-actions commented

Welcome to AsyncAPI. Thanks a lot for reporting your first issue. Please check out our contributors guide and the instructions about a basic recommended setup useful for opening a pull request.

Keep in mind there are also other channels you can use to interact with AsyncAPI community. For more details check out this issue.

github-actions commented

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity 😴
It will be closed in 60 days if no further activity occurs. To unstale this issue, add a comment with detailed explanation.
Thank you for your contributions ❤️

github-actions commented

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity 😴
It will be closed in 60 days if no further activity occurs. To unstale this issue, add a comment with detailed explanation.
Thank you for your contributions ❤️

joerg-walter-de commented

Since it may be very reasonable to send multiple different messages through one channel but I am only able to specify an operation ID per channel, I am forced to put the discrimination logic into the channel operation. I think, an (optional) operation ID per message may be more flexible.

I haven't explored the generator/validator aspects of AsyncAPI in total. I am used to generate client code for OpenAPI specs, that is for example callable JS functions where the function names match the operationId s and the functions provide datagram / parameter validation. And obviously it would be nice for a client to be able to call sendPing(), subscribeToData() etc. that is, to have a send-function for each possible message. Having a operationId for each message would help achieving that, I guess.

github-actions commented

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity 😴

It will be closed in 120 days if no further activity occurs. To unstale this issue, add a comment with a detailed explanation.

There can be many reasons why some specific issue has no activity. The most probable cause is lack of time, not lack of interest. AsyncAPI Initiative is a Linux Foundation project not owned by a single for-profit company. It is a community-driven initiative ruled under open governance model.

Let us figure out together how to push this issue forward. Connect with us through one of many communication channels we established here.

Thank you for your patience ❤️

github-actions commented

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity 😴

It will be closed in 120 days if no further activity occurs. To unstale this issue, add a comment with a detailed explanation.

There can be many reasons why some specific issue has no activity. The most probable cause is lack of time, not lack of interest. AsyncAPI Initiative is a Linux Foundation project not owned by a single for-profit company. It is a community-driven initiative ruled under open governance model.

Let us figure out together how to push this issue forward. Connect with us through one of many communication channels we established here.

Thank you for your patience ❤️

derberg commented

still relevant, just better to first rewrite template to React

github-actions commented

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity 😴

It will be closed in 120 days if no further activity occurs. To unstale this issue, add a comment with a detailed explanation.

There can be many reasons why some specific issue has no activity. The most probable cause is lack of time, not lack of interest. AsyncAPI Initiative is a Linux Foundation project not owned by a single for-profit company. It is a community-driven initiative ruled under open governance model.

Let us figure out together how to push this issue forward. Connect with us through one of many communication channels we established here.

Thank you for your patience ❤️

github-actions commented

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity 😴

It will be closed in 120 days if no further activity occurs. To unstale this issue, add a comment with a detailed explanation.

There can be many reasons why some specific issue has no activity. The most probable cause is lack of time, not lack of interest. AsyncAPI Initiative is a Linux Foundation project not owned by a single for-profit company. It is a community-driven initiative ruled under open governance model.

Let us figure out together how to push this issue forward. Connect with us through one of many communication channels we established here.

Thank you for your patience ❤️