Improve support for OpenAPI in minimal actions

[captainsafia]

• Adds extension methods for adding ProducesResponseTypeAttributes on endpoints to resolve Improve OpenAPI/Swagger response metadata for returned IResults #33924
• Adds SuppressAPI extension methods to resolve Add IgnoreApi() extension method for IEndpointConventionBuilder #34068
• Adds WithName extension method to resolve Add IgnoreApi() extension method for IEndpointConventionBuilder #34068
• Adds WithGroupName extension method and metadata classes to resolve Allow setting a group name for endpoints and have it be used to populate ApiDescription.GroupName in ApiExplorer for minimal APIs #34541
• Support SetContentTypes in ProducesResponseTypeAttribute to resolve Update ProducesResponseTypeAttribute to support setting content types for the defined response #34542

[ghost]

Thank you for submitting this for API review. This will be reviewed by @dotnet/aspnet-api-review at the next meeting of the ASP.NET Core API Review group. Please ensure you take a look at the API review process documentation and ensure that:

• The PR contains changes to the reference-assembly that describe the API change. Or, you have included a snippet of reference-assembly-style code that illustrates the API change.
• The PR describes the impact to users, both positive (useful new APIs) and negative (breaking changes).
• Someone is assigned to "champion" this change in the meeting, and they understand the impact and design of the change.

[pranavkm]

• SuppressApi -> ExclueFromApiExplorer
• Do not type forward types from MVC.
• We would want to update ApiExplorer features to implement the new interfaces
• We'll keep an attribute per feature e.g. WithGroupName, WithName, ExcludeFromApiExplorer

[DamianEdwards]

I have a mild concern regarding the name ExcludeFromApiExplorer (yes even though I suggested it 😄) as it ties this so tightly to ApiExplorer as the mechanism by which metadata about APIs is consumed. We had discussed at one point the idea that eventually systems like Swashbuckle should look directly at endpoint metadata to build up the details required for their functioning rather than relying exclusively on ApiExplorer as it's an MVC concept and minimal APIs are not MVC. That said, the only alternative naming I can think of that would cater to that concern would be something like ExcludeFromApiDescriptions or ExcludeFromApiDocumentation.

Like I said, it's a mild concern but I figured I'd raise it now.

[martincostello]

🎉

[pranavkm]

Let me do a quick sanity test on this. I don't super remember how this gets used, but I'd like to make sure we have additional MVC integration tests for this now that we're enabling this.

[captainsafia]

Sure. From what I could tell, this gets used like an out var but it is tricky to reason about.

aspnetcore/src/Mvc/Mvc.ApiExplorer/src/DefaultApiDescriptionProvider.cs

Lines 439 to 442 in 709038b

	foreach (var metadataAttribute in requestMetadataAttributes)
	{
	metadataAttribute.SetContentTypes(contentTypes);
	}

[pranavkm]

This looks wrong - the action says that it only returns xml:

aspnetcore/src/Mvc/test/WebSites/ApiExplorerWebSite/Controllers/ApiExplorerResponseTypeWithAttributeController.cs

Lines 66 to 69 in 8b30d86

	[Produces("text/xml")] // Has status code as 200 but is not applied as it does not set 'Type'
	[ProducesResponseType(typeof(Product), 201)]
	[ProducesResponseType(typeof(SerializableError), 400)]
	public Product CreateProductWithLimitedResponseContentTypes(Product product)

We can't change this.

[pranavkm]

Marking this as blocked until we can resolve the test change.

[pranavkm]

Please add the test so we have the behavior documented. Outside of that, this looks good.

[DamianEdwards]

🎉

[ghost]

Hi @DamianEdwards. It looks like you just commented on a closed PR. The team will most probably miss it. If you'd like to bring something important up to their attention, consider filing a new issue and add enough details to build context.

[bradygaster]

also 🎉

[ghost]

Hi @bradygaster. It looks like you just commented on a closed PR. The team will most probably miss it. If you'd like to bring something important up to their attention, consider filing a new issue and add enough details to build context.