Skip to content

Conversation

ralfhandl
Copy link
Contributor

  • no schema changes are needed for this pull request

@ralfhandl ralfhandl requested review from a team as code owners September 20, 2025 15:49
@ralfhandl ralfhandl added the editorial Wording and stylistic issues label Sep 20, 2025
@ralfhandl ralfhandl added this to the v3.3.0 milestone Sep 20, 2025
| Field Name | Type | Description |
| ---- | :----: | ---- |
| <a name="oas-version"></a>openapi | `string` | **REQUIRED**. This string MUST be the [version number](#versions-and-deprecation) of the OpenAPI Specification that the OpenAPI document uses. The `openapi` field SHOULD be used by tooling to interpret the OpenAPI document. This is _not_ related to the [`info.version`](#info-version) string, which describes the OpenAPI document's version. |
| <a name="oas-self"></a>$self | `string` | This string MUST be in the form of a URI reference as defined by [[RFC3986]] [Section 4.1](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3986#section-4.1). The `$self` field provides the self-assigned URI of this document, which also serves as its base URI in accordance with [[RFC3986]] [Section 5.1.1](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3986#section-5.1.1). Implementations MUST support identifying the targets of [API description URIs](#relative-references-in-api-description-uris) using the URI defined by this field when it is present. See [Establishing the Base URI](#establishing-the-base-uri) for the base URI behavior when `$self` is absent or relative, and see [Appendix F]((#appendix-f-examples-of-base-uri-determination-and-reference-resolution)) for examples of using `$self` to resolve references. |
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd rather keep the initial 3.3 set-up commit separate from other fixes. It makes it a lot easier to diff along a specific release line and see what went in (which is something I do from time to time).

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Backed out the link fix.

Now we just have to remember to squash-merge this PR.

@ralfhandl ralfhandl requested review from handrews and a team September 20, 2025 17:31
@handrews
Copy link
Member

@ralfhandl could you please just rebase it into one commit and force-push? "We just have to remember to..." is unlikely to happen.

Copy link
Member

@handrews handrews left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Marking as "request changes" because this should be one commit before approval, not after.

@lornajane
Copy link
Contributor

Given that we had to disable all the sync jobs for a git reason, I suggest that we might want to hold off on doing more or less anything on 3.3 for now

@lornajane lornajane closed this Sep 21, 2025
@lornajane
Copy link
Contributor

lornajane commented Sep 21, 2025

Sorry, didn't mean to actually close the thing!

@lornajane lornajane reopened this Sep 21, 2025
@ralfhandl ralfhandl closed this Sep 21, 2025
@ralfhandl ralfhandl deleted the ralfhandl-patch-2 branch September 21, 2025 16:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
editorial Wording and stylistic issues
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants