json-editor VS laminar

Combined with the fact that the parameter UI is highly dynamic through plugins(like how the extended choice parameters plugin supports defining complex input forms using json-editor means you can use Jenkins as an interface to run any kind of job that requires almost any type of input.

I use JSON schema to generate JSON-editing forms via json-editor: https://github.com/json-editor/json-editor

Then I can use the same schema in the backend to validate the data, both sent in via the form and directly with the application/json content-type. It's a pretty smooth flow, and reduces a lot of redundancy.

I have found stuff similar to this, for example json-editor.

JSON Editor takes a JSON Schema and uses it to generate an HTML form.

Some project followed that way like json-editor

json-editor is a really easy way to build complex forms. The resulting schema is returned as json which you can just convert to yaml. I use this in Jenkins for complex parameters.

https://github.com/json-editor/json-editor was used in the backbone.js version of swagger-ui to generate input forms from json-schema.

The main (and only) criticism I’ve ever heard about graphql in the companies I worked for was that it is very js-oriented all the best libs/frameworks for it are for react frontend / node server mostly.

Backend scala / php devs looked at it with distaste in their eyes, coming up with various reasons why its not a good idea.

And to be fair with tools like openapi / grpc a lot of the benefits of graphql can be replicated.

Even if they are clumsy and fragmented compared to it in my eyes, they still work well enough and keep devs in all camps happy enough, and compromise as they say is “when everyone is equally unhappy”.

Now placed in situations like this I am usually forced to reimplement graphql tooling with the chosen api tech (for example https://github.com/ovotech/laminar) and if me as a single dev could do it, then I’d wager if there was stronger tech leadership, all the other tech tribes could just smooth the edges that they didn’t like for using graphql in their respective languages … but sadly that has not been my experience.

I use it extensively in prod. Well the superset that is OpenApi. It enables contract first development where any change to the api is done in the schema fist, and then implemented by the clients/server.

Since we have tooling[0] that validates requests and responses at runtime, the clients can be absolutely sure of what they receive (we through 500 if the server attempts to respond with an undocumented respond) And the server is also sure about the shape of the requests. This allows us to validate everything at compile time too, generating typescript types for both client and server.

And since we have similar tooling regarding our data stores (typescript types for sql queries) most of the time if there is a bug, the code would simply not compile - pretty nifty!

[0] - https://github.com/ovotech/laminar

If the api has some contract with it OpenApi / Swagger / etc, its surprisingly easy to write a parser that would convert those to typescript types. TS has an awesome use as a library itself where you can write the ast with, and then tell it to convert it to code.

We use it to great effect ourselves, by generating types for axios.

https://github.com/ovotech/laminar/tree/main/packages/lamina...

Now granted, you’re now trusting the api writers with their contract, but if its another team in the org we’ve found it to be warranted.