Hmm, ok. The extra info helps. FWIW, at work, we're moving off Swagger for reasons not clear to me, and my team mainly uses Apiary with some mkdocs stuff. So you could look into those?
On Sunday, August 26, 2018 at 11:00:09 AM UTC-4, ju5t wrote: > > Sorry, perhaps I should have posted what I have done already. We've been > running Swagger for a while already and are currently looking into the > default documentation options in DRF as they have been improving. The > documentation didn't answer my question unfortunately. I'm specifically > looking to document our responses. > > I just found a discussion on Github about response schema's. That's > basically what I was looking for. > > https://github.com/marcgibbons/django-rest-swagger/issues/583 > https://github.com/encode/django-rest-framework/issues/4502 > > Apparently it did get mentioned in some 3.6 notes of DRF but never made it > into the release. > > drf-yasg does support documenting response schema's but they don't support > AcceptHeaderVersioning. I guess we have not much choice but to document it > in docstrings for now. From the looks of it, 3.8 may see improved support > for this. > > > On Sunday, August 26, 2018 at 2:47:27 PM UTC+2, Jason wrote: >> >> have you looked at >> http://www.django-rest-framework.org/topics/documenting-your-api/ >> >> you can add all that example info to the docstring of a view. >> Alternatively, there's >> https://github.com/marcgibbons/django-rest-swagger/ and apiary, which >> are two options you can use to document your API. >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django REST framework" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-rest-framework+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
