Hi,
We can move the same functionality to the "*POST
/import/api?preserveProvider={false} -F file={@api.zip}*" API with another
optional query parameter "*isOverwrite*" to update an existing API. Instead
of giving the APIID to update, can't we get the existing API using the
name, version, and
Hi Ishara,
If we supporting cross tenant subscriptions we have to give access to
comment creation.
Thanks
On Thursday, August 15, 2019, Ishara Cooray wrote:
> Should we allow users to comment on APIs which belong to different
> tenants? If not we can remove '#/parameters/requestedTenant'
Hi,
username:
>> type: string
>> description: |
>> If username is not given user invoking the API will be taken as
>> the username.
>>
>> Regarding the description: I guess we should omit it when posting a
comment and always use the logged-in user?
+1
>
Should we allow users to comment on APIs which belong to different tenants?
If not we can remove '#/parameters/requestedTenant' from POST operation.
IMO this is not required as if we need to comment on an api we need to
login to the particular tenant.
Hence +1 to remove
Hi all,
If we supporting cross tenant subscriptions we have to give access to
comment creation.
+ 1 for this. we will need to check if cross tenant subscriptions are
available and allow the commenting. Also another possibility is similar to
cross tenant subscriptions we can *add an option to
