Conversation
|
regarding compatibility check, I think the change is compatible, its a new optional field |
|
About SAPScript long texts already some discussion started. I am afraid I guess we need some time to resolve it. I try to find some time to involve corresponding colleagues next week. Please be a bit patient with me. |
okay, we kind of need it to move forward with abapGit/abapGit#7606, in order to not loose data |
|
I have pinged the colleagues. |
|
I think lets move forward #130 was opened 5 years ago |
|
I am sorry for the late response. I have already got feedback by the colleagues some days ago but I didn't manage to answer here, earlier. There is a team working on another, more readable representation for SAP Script documentation, currently. I cannot share more details on this for now. I see two options for going forward for the integration in abapGit:
In any case, I would suggest to move the documentation to a dedicated file instead of incorporating it into the existing JSON representation. What do you think? |
|
-> single file as json will work for now -> PR needs a bit of rework and defining some structure |
ABAP Doc Checks
|
schneidermic0
left a comment
schneidermic0
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for splitting this up into a dedicated file. This make sense to me.
Format in general also looks good to me. I have just some naming proposals to avoid "longtexts".
| @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ | |||
| "! <p class="shorttext synchronized" lang="en">Long text types</p> | |||
| "! Types for AFF long texts | |||
| INTERFACE zif_aff_longtexts_types_v1 PUBLIC. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LIMU DOCU could end up in:
| INTERFACE zif_aff_longtexts_types_v1 PUBLIC. | |
| INTERFACE zif_aff_docu_v1 PUBLIC. |
| File | Cardinality | Definition | Schema | Example | ||
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | ||
| `<name>.doma.json` | 1 | [`zif_aff_doma_v1.intf.abap`](./type/zif_aff_doma_v1.intf.abap) | [`doma-v1.json`](./doma-v1.json) | [`z_aff_example.doma.json`](./examples/z_aff_example.doma.json) | ||
| `<name>.doma.longtext.json` | 0...1 | [`zif_aff_longtexts_types_v1.intf.abap`](../zif_aff_longtexts_types_v1.intf.abap) | [`longtexts-v1.json`](../longtexts-v1.json) | [`z_aff_example.doma.longtext.json`](./examples/z_aff_example.doma.longtext.json) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a minor: And for sure we can debate about this: I suggest to use either "documentation" or just "docu" instead of "longtext". This fits also better to the transport object LIMU DOCU. Longtext might to fit for domains for others I believe docu(mentation) would be better.
What do you think?
|
@schneidermic0 comments above addressed |
schneidermic0
left a comment
schneidermic0
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, I missed the update. Thanks for pinging me.
I just find a very small thing that I missed before. I try to include the suggested changes right away.
|
@schneidermic0 new changes require another approval, looks like merges does that too |
I didn't find a setting for the automatic merges. Do you know where this can be specified? |
3 participants
example in https://github.com/abapGit-tests/DOMA-longtext/blob/main/src/zdoma_long.doma.xml
also relevant for MSAG, https://github.com/SAP/abap-file-formats/blob/main/file-formats/msag/README.md
found out while working on abapGit/abapGit#7606