Cannot retrieve RAML annotations applied to Library

[kdubb]

Your issue may already be reported! Please search on Github issues before creating one.

• I'm submitting a ...

  • bug report
  • feature request
  • question
  • other

• What is the current behavior?

RAML Library level annotations are lost or inaccessible after parsing. API's add the annotation(s) to the root encoded object in EncodesModel.encode.

• If the current behavior is a bug, please provide the minimal steps to reproduce with AMF code. Please don't upload AMF code mixed with yours.
  Given the following RAML library example...

#%RAML 1.0 Library
uses:
  gen: ../generator.raml

(gen.javaModelPackage): io.test.lib

types:

  Test:
    type: object
    properties:
      value: string

There is no way to retrieve the javaModelPackage annotation. On an API (aka Document) there's and EncodesModel trait and the annotation is applied to the root of the encoded model. With a Library there is no way to retrieve the top level annotation.

Note that generator.raml just defines some annotations for generating code.

• What is the expected behavior?

It should be possible to retrieve the annotations from Library & Fragment modules as well.

• What is the motivation/use case for changing the behavior? (for feature requests)

• Please tell us about your environment:

  • AMF Version: 4.5.1
  • AMF Distribution: JVM or JS
  • Operating System: macOS
  • Link to your project:

• Other information (e.g. detailed explanation, stack traces, related issues, suggestions how to fix, links for us to have context, eg. StackOverflow, Gitter, etc)

[kdubb]

A "proper" solution might be adding a customDomainProperties to BaseUnit where top-level annotations are available for all RAML module types.

[looseale]

Hi @kdubb .
You are right, the spec allows that function and currently the annotations in the root level are missing because they don't have a place in the current library model (Module).
I created the internal ticket https://www.mulesoft.org/jira/browse/APIMF-2769 to check this. We will keep you informed of any news.

[kdubb]

I'm willing to contribute a PR if you can point me in the right direction. We're moving from the old RAML parser and this is a blocking issue for us.

[kdubb]

@looseale Also, it's worth noting that although the 3.0 OpenAPI spec only allow "extensions" on certain elements... all the notable parser implementations seem to allow extension nearly everywhere; specifically on document root and schema items.

[kdubb]

@looseale Any thoughts on when this might be fixed or how I can help get this started?

[tomsfernandez]

Hi @kdubb. This issue was resolved in #817. It will be available on the release of AMF's next version next week.

Thanks for raising the issue.
With the merged PR I'm closing the issue.