Fran Méndez

In general, my response would be that it's a good practice to define what messages might circulate in a channel, however, I understand the limitations and that's why I added...

Hey @Neverbolt. Sorry, I somehow missed this issue. I think it makes total sense to have it in the next version of the spec. I'm now preparing the [3.0.0 Release...

Just leaving a thought here for the future. IMHO, I think whatever solution we come up with, we should make sure it can easily integrate with external schema registries. Also,...

Random thought. We can probably encode the version number in the schema name as @damaru-inc is proposing in his first example but in a more standardized way. Example: ```yaml components:...

> ```yaml > components: > schemas: > Person: > info: > id: 'some:company:Person' # unique id for schema. It will be very helpful for schema registries > version: '1.0.0' >...

Yeah, I think it should go inside the bindings object (solution 2). The same protocol header might be different in each protocol. For instance, `Content-Type` for HTTP and `contentType` for...

> `brokers` would be only for this new spec, right? Yes, but that's only the key name. They're Server Objects. > I'm not 100% opinionated yet, but my thoughts so...

An event gateway is not a common application IMHO. It's a server implementing any protocol and publishing and subscribing to all the channels. That would be defined using this new...

It is not "it is Application or a Broker". It is about being an Application or simply a collection of resources (messages, channels, servers, etc.). I called the latter a...

Thanks for the quick feedback, Maciej! 🙌 > Why do you want to define the message(s) in the channel, not as currently in the operation level? At least 2 reasons...