mirror of
https://github.com/ilyakooo0/compaREST.git
synced 2024-08-15 17:30:23 +03:00
Add a dev and a user guide (#120)
* Add a dev and a user guide * Changes
This commit is contained in:
mniip
GitHub
parent
e71cbde9c1
commit
a1ea91fc50
149
docs/Development_guide.md
Normal file
149
docs/Development_guide.md
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,149 @@
|
||||
CompaREST
|
||||
=========
|
||||
The tool works by simultaneously looking at a pair of nodes in OpenAPI schema
|
||||
trees. At every place we try to understand whether one side (the producer) can
|
||||
produce something that the other side (the consumer) cannot consume. This often
|
||||
involves recursively running the same check on child sub-nodes. The necessary
|
||||
criteria are implemented manually for all types of nodes that appear in the
|
||||
schema. The `Subtree` class in `Data.OpenApi.Compare.Subtree` designates types
|
||||
of nodes for which this compatibility checking is defined. The implementations
|
||||
for various types reside in `Data.OpenApi.Compare.Validate.*`.
|
||||
|
||||
Producer/Consumer
|
||||
-----------------
|
||||
Rather than looking at which schema is the server's and which is the client's,
|
||||
in terms of compatibility checking it is more useful to track which side is the
|
||||
"producer" and which is the "consumer". At the root of the schema the producer
|
||||
is the client, but as we descend into an HTTP response, the direction flips and
|
||||
the producer becomes the server.
|
||||
|
||||
We deal with a lot of things in pairs, where one thing belongs to the producer
|
||||
and another belongs to the consumer. The `ProdCons` datatype (in
|
||||
`Data.OpenApi.Compare.Subtree`) is just a pair type that provides an Applicative
|
||||
abstraction for working with two things simultaneously.
|
||||
|
||||
Trees
|
||||
-----
|
||||
We directly use the datatypes defined in the `openapi3` library. For reasons of
|
||||
identifiability and memoization we tag all nodes in the trees with a path from
|
||||
the root. The tree is heterogeneous (nodes have different types), and every type
|
||||
of node has a different arrangement of children. There is a `Step` data family
|
||||
that defines all the possible children (of a specific type) of a node (of a
|
||||
specific type).
|
||||
|
||||
A `Trace` is a sequence of steps, except in a path the types of adjacent steps
|
||||
have to agree. The `Paths` datatype achieves this. Together all paths form a
|
||||
`Category`, and we often concatenate them using `>>>`. This is defined in
|
||||
`Data.OpenApi.Compare.Paths`.
|
||||
|
||||
We often keep a node and a path to it next to each other using an environment
|
||||
comonad. `Traced` is a type alias around `Env` which ensures that the type of
|
||||
the path matches the type of the node.
|
||||
|
||||
Issues
|
||||
------
|
||||
The output of the tool is a list of compatibility issues that came up during
|
||||
checking. The `Issue` data family describes the kinds of issues that can occur
|
||||
at each type of node. An issue is supposed to characterize a set of interactions
|
||||
(requests or responses) that demonstrate that the schemas are incompatible.
|
||||
|
||||
Each issue is tagged with a `Behavior` that describes the path to reproducing
|
||||
the issue. While a `Trace` describes a syntactic path down the schema tree, a
|
||||
`Behavior` describes which part of an interaction needs to be focused on for the
|
||||
issue to manifest itself.
|
||||
|
||||
In most places where we keep multiple issues (e.g. the output), to store them we
|
||||
use a prefix tree map, indexed by both types and values of `Behavior`s. See
|
||||
`Data.OpenApi.Compare.PathsPrefixTree`.
|
||||
|
||||
Report
|
||||
------
|
||||
The checker ultimately outputs a list of `Issue`s, together with `Behavior`s
|
||||
that cause them. We run the checker twice: forwards and backwards -- to detect
|
||||
non-breaking changes. All of this is then compiled into a report in
|
||||
`Data.OpenApi.Compare.Report`. The tree structure of headings is computed from
|
||||
`Behavior`s, using `Jet`s to collapse particular sequences of behavior steps
|
||||
into a single human-readable header item. The text of each paragraph comes from
|
||||
`describeIssue`.
|
||||
|
||||
We then use the `pandoc` library to render the report in a variety of formats.
|
||||
|
||||
Formulas
|
||||
--------
|
||||
The schema has references, so it can end up being recursive. Similarly the
|
||||
process for establishing compatibility can end up being recursive. To keep track
|
||||
of this, the checker actually manipulates *formulas* which can have variables in
|
||||
them, defined in (`Data.OpenApi.Compare.Formula`).
|
||||
|
||||
A formula represents a set of issues, with the empty set corresponding to a
|
||||
successful compatibility check. A formula can have conjunctions, where we only
|
||||
report success if all parts succeeded, and if not we take the union of all
|
||||
issues. A formula can also have disjunctions, but there it's impossible to
|
||||
guarantee that the issues for the parts also make sense as issues for the whole
|
||||
thing. Due to this if all disjuncted parts have issues we instead return a
|
||||
different issue (usually non-descriptive).
|
||||
|
||||
The `FormulaF` datatype implements a functor that carries formulaic calculations
|
||||
as well as a result value (a co-Yoneda extension of formulas for the most part).
|
||||
The Applicative interface provides conjunction, and the Alternative interface
|
||||
provides disjunction.
|
||||
|
||||
When we detect recursion we introduce a variable, compute the compatibility
|
||||
check as a formula with that variable, and then we solve a fixed point equation
|
||||
(`maxFixpoint`) with the variable to obtain the answer.
|
||||
|
||||
This `FomulaF` is further wrapped in a couple monad transformers
|
||||
(`SemanticCompatFormula`, `StructuralCompatFormula`), and the whole checker is
|
||||
then implemented in the resulting Applicative using ApplicativeDo.
|
||||
|
||||
Memoization
|
||||
-----------
|
||||
The `Data.OpenApi.Compare.Memo` module contains utilities for stateful
|
||||
memoization and recursion detection. The entire checking process is memoized,
|
||||
and can detect, propagate, and resolve recursion.
|
||||
|
||||
Structural/Semantic Compatibility
|
||||
---------------------------------
|
||||
When we encounter two nodes we first try to optimistically establish whether
|
||||
they're structurally equal, i.e. the trees are exactly the same modulo reference
|
||||
inlining. This check is also memoized and recursion-aware. If the check succeeds
|
||||
we conclude that the schemas are compatible. Otherwise we fall back to the
|
||||
"normal" semantic compatibility.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
JSON Schema
|
||||
-----------
|
||||
The language that describes JSON payloads is probably the richest part of
|
||||
OpenAPI schemas, and the checker for it also comes with a lot of moving parts.
|
||||
|
||||
JSON schema allows arbitrary set arithmetic using `allOf`, `anyOf`, `not` and
|
||||
`oneOf`. To fully check `not` and `oneOf` we would need to compare set
|
||||
subtraction, which involves negating a comparison result. If recursion is
|
||||
involved we would need to be able to solve equations with negation, which we
|
||||
cannot do. So `not` is unsupported altogether, and `oneOf` is only supported
|
||||
when it has disjoint branches and behaves like `anyOf`.
|
||||
|
||||
With that in mind a JSON schema is first pre-processed into a Disjunctive Normal
|
||||
Form (`DNF` in `Data.OpenApi.Compare.Validate.Schema.DNF`). This pre-processing
|
||||
happens in `Data.OpenApi.Compare.Validate.Schema.Process`.
|
||||
|
||||
The DNF contains elementary clauses that match on a specific aspect of a JSON
|
||||
object (`Condition`). Most clauses only affect objects of a single type, so JSON
|
||||
values and clauses are segregated by type (`JsonType`, `TypedValue` in
|
||||
`Data.OpenApi.Compare.Validate.Schema.JsonFormula`)
|
||||
|
||||
Then we reduce the problem of comparing two DNF's to the comparison of a
|
||||
conjunction of clauses in the producer with a single clause in the consumer
|
||||
(`checkFormulas` in `Data.OpenApi.Compare.Validate.Schema`).
|
||||
|
||||
When we do disjunction in the formula we lose information, so we try to avoid
|
||||
having disjunctions in the consumer DNF. This is done by the means of
|
||||
partitioning. We look for factors that would let us partition the set of all
|
||||
objects into several bins, in a way that hopefully corresponds only a single
|
||||
consumer to each producer. This is implemented in
|
||||
`Data.OpenApi.Compare.Validate.Schema.Partition`. Currently we can only
|
||||
partition by an `enum` value that is accessible via a chain of `required`
|
||||
fields.
|
||||
|
||||
The same partitioning mechanism is used to test whether the branches of a
|
||||
`oneOf` are disjoint, and emit a warning otherwise.
|
||||
51
docs/User_guide.md
Normal file
51
docs/User_guide.md
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
|
||||
CompaREST User Guide
|
||||
====================
|
||||
|
||||
Running the Tool
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
The tool accepts two OpenAPI 3.0.0 schema files in either JSON or YAML format.
|
||||
One is assumed to be the client version of the schema, and the other is the
|
||||
server version.
|
||||
|
||||
The tool will look for changes between the schemas and detect whether they are
|
||||
breaking or not -- that is, if they prevent interoperability between the client
|
||||
and the server.
|
||||
|
||||
Running:
|
||||
```
|
||||
comparest -c client.json -s server.json
|
||||
```
|
||||
will output a markdown report of the changes to the standard output.
|
||||
|
||||
Compatibility status can be signaled via the exit code using
|
||||
`--signal-exit-code`. In case no report is needed, output can be suppressed with
|
||||
`--silent`. For example:
|
||||
```
|
||||
comparest -c client.json -s server.json --signal-exit-code --silent
|
||||
echo $?
|
||||
```
|
||||
If there were changes that the tool determined to be breaking, the exit code
|
||||
will be 1. If there were some changes the tool couldn't understand, the exit
|
||||
code will be 2. Otherwise if there were no breaking changes, the exit code will
|
||||
be 0.
|
||||
|
||||
Controlling the Report
|
||||
----------------------
|
||||
By default the report includes breaking changes, as well as non-breaking:
|
||||
changes that would be considered breaking in the opposite direction. To only
|
||||
include breaking changes in the report use `--only-breaking`. The `--all` option
|
||||
restores the default behavior.
|
||||
|
||||
The report can be formatted in a variety of ways supported by Pandoc. The `-o`
|
||||
option causes the report to be written to a file. The format of the file is
|
||||
determined from the extension. The supported extensions include:
|
||||
- `.md` for markdown
|
||||
- `.html` for an HTML snippet
|
||||
- `.rst` for restructured text
|
||||
- no extension for a self-contained HTML document with styles
|
||||
|
||||
By default the report is split up into parts relating to different paths,
|
||||
requests, responses, etc, using headers of various levels. Alternatively, the
|
||||
report can use indended block-quotes to visualize the tree structure of the
|
||||
report. The header style is enabled with `--header-style`, and the block-quote
|
||||
style is enabled with `--folding-block-quotes-style`.
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user