Francesco Tumanischvili

one way to achieve what you want is having your resource method return e.g. `Map` which would result in a spec with a response to the one above: ``` @GET...

@karlvr thanks for looking into this! I am not sure though what the problem is about. You can define multiple security requirements by using multiple `@SecurityRequirement` annotations which will be...

@karlvr Thanks a lot, journey has been enlightening! So yes, PRs are more than welcome, maybe a way to get this is without breaking compatibility could be adding an annotation...

@amorozov Thanks for looking into this and nope, no PRs yet

Thanks for reporting this; it would need further investigations,however a workaround to avoid the null pointer is explicitly providing a `buildClasspath` parameter to the `resolveFull` task, like: ``` task(resolveFull, type:...

Thanks for looking into it, and yes a PR is welcome A possible alternative to your proposal is still using a new `@Schema` field but also deprecating `required`, similar to...

@nvervelle, sorry the above was confusing and with an invalid value.. idea is the following: * `AUTO` will let the library decide based on its heuristics * `NOT_REQUIRED` will force...

Thanks for reporting and investigating this. Can you possibly add a PR? In case, I'd probably go for your option 1 with fix on `Schema` class

at the moment you can achieve what you need using filter, as in the example below; possibly related annotation processing will be enhanced to allow for annotation only handling of...

This would work defining multiple contents within `200` response: ``` @POST @Operation(summary = "Create multilevel query execution", responses = { @ApiResponse(responseCode = "200", content = { @Content(mediaType = "application/multiLevel+json", schema...