feat(ibm-operationid-naming-convention): extend operationid naming check - #757
Merged
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Lídia Tarcza <100163235+diatrcz@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Lídia Tarcza <100163235+diatrcz@users.noreply.github.com>
pyrooka
reviewed
Aug 26, 2025
|
|
||
| const verbs = []; | ||
|
|
||
| // Verbs where pluralization can happen in the operationId based on the path |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| // Verbs where pluralization can happen in the operationId based on the path | |
| // Verbs where pluralization can happen in the operationId based on the path. |
Comment on lines
+199
to
+201
| // If we have an acceptable verb, then make sure | ||
| // that the operationId starts with that verb | ||
| // and that the rest of the operation id matches the path according to the naming conventions |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| // If we have an acceptable verb, then make sure | |
| // that the operationId starts with that verb | |
| // and that the rest of the operation id matches the path according to the naming conventions | |
| // If we have an acceptable verb, then make sure | |
| // that the operationId starts with that verb | |
| // and that the rest of the operation id matches | |
| // the path according to the naming conventions. |
| const convertedPath = fullPath | ||
| .replace(/^\/+/, '') | ||
| .split('/') | ||
| .filter(part => !/^\{.*\}$/.test(part)); |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| .filter(part => !/^\{.*\}$/.test(part)); | |
| .filter(part => !part.startsWith('{') && !part.endsWith('}')); |
| .split('/') | ||
| .filter(part => !/^\{.*\}$/.test(part)); | ||
|
|
||
| //singularize the words in the path according to the naming conventions |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| //singularize the words in the path according to the naming conventions | |
| // Singularize the words in the path according to the naming conventions. |
| for (let i = 0; i < verbs.length; i++) { | ||
| const correctId = verbs[i] + '_' + convertedPath.join('_'); | ||
| if (correctId === operationId) | ||
| return { checkPassed: true, correctId, operationId }; |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| return { checkPassed: true, correctId, operationId }; | |
| return { checkPassed: true }; |
… naming check Signed-off-by: Lídia Tarcza <100163235+diatrcz@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Lídia Tarcza <100163235+diatrcz@users.noreply.github.com>
pyrooka
approved these changes
Aug 27, 2025
pyrooka
left a comment
pyrooka
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good!
I think we should use a feat type commit for this PR when merging it, since it adds new functionality to a rule, not just fixes an issue. Just my thought, up to you! :)
diatrcz
changed the title
ibm-devx-sdk
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 27, 2025
# @ibm-cloud/openapi-ruleset [1.32.0](https://github.com/IBM/openapi-validator/compare/@ibm-cloud/openapi-ruleset@1.31.2...@ibm-cloud/openapi-ruleset@1.32.0) (2025-08-27) ### Features * **ibm-operationid-naming-convention:** extend operationid naming check ([#757](#757)) ([72bf9f2](72bf9f2))
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 1.32.0 🎉 The release is available on npm package (@latest dist-tag) Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
ibm-devx-sdk
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 27, 2025
# ibm-openapi-validator [1.36.0](https://github.com/IBM/openapi-validator/compare/ibm-openapi-validator@1.35.3...ibm-openapi-validator@1.36.0) (2025-08-27) ### Features * **ibm-operationid-naming-convention:** extend operationid naming check ([#757](#757)) ([72bf9f2](72bf9f2)) ### Dependencies * **@ibm-cloud/openapi-ruleset:** upgraded to 1.32.0
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 1.36.0 🎉 The release is available on npm package (@latest dist-tag) Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 1.9.1 🎉 The release is available on npm package (@latest dist-tag) Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Extends the ibm-operationid-naming-convention rule so now it checks if operation IDs follow the handbook naming convention rule or not.
PR Checklist
General checklist
Please make sure that your PR fulfills the following requirements:
.secrets.baselinehas been updated as needednpm run update-utilitieshas been run if any files inpackages/utilities/srchave been updatedChecklist for adding a new validation rule: