Replies: 9 comments 3 replies
-
| 
         Hey @zdunecki do you have an example document and a list of the things you would like it to deal with? When you mention x-go is that an extension you have in your document? That you want removed?  | 
  
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
| 
         It would be awesome to have control over what should be sanitized. Yes, I'm using  I think it may be reasonable to have a sanitizer that removes ALL things that are not from the standard OpenAPI spec + an API to control what elements should be sanitized, for example, via an option like: (rly prof of concept)  | 
  
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
| 
         thanks for the suggestion @zdunecki I will start with something that as you says just removes anything not native to the OAS. And will look at adding some options for targeting specific extensions, specifying options to remove unused components etc and we can make it extensible for any future suggestions. Not sure I will get to it this week but will definitely add it shortly  | 
  
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
| 
        
 Thanks a lot. If you need a contribution, I'm open.  | 
  
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
| 
         Feel free to have a go at implementing it. We would love contributions. You can use things like: 
 as examples of the underlying methods we add for the utility methods and their relevant tests and then see them being implemented as commands:  | 
  
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
| 
         @zdunecki I had a go at implementing this here #59 please have a look and let me know what you think  | 
  
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
| 
         This feature has just been released and will be in the next build of the CLI https://github.com/speakeasy-api/openapi/releases/tag/v1.8.0  | 
  
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
| 
        
 Wow, thanks! At first glance, it looks fine, but as far as I can see, sanitization works only by excluding something, not including. If so, for many cases it will be harder to maintain, cuz in my case, for example, I need to sanitize it to the most common format - like supporting only a few extensions. Including will be much easier than excluding Best,  | 
  
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
| 
         Thanks Patryk for the suggestion, closing now as its be implemented  | 
  
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hi, thanks for CLI, it's pretty nice.
Are willing to create an
sanitizefunction? Let's say I'd like to have a clean output withoutx-goand other mess.If possible, are you open to such change as contribution?
Best,
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions