> One of the best decisions we made was to auto generate the OpenAPI specs from our code.<p>I'm curious as to what they used to do this. It's been a major pain point for me for five-odd years that Elixir Phoenix (don't know if Brex used Phoenix for this) doesn't have an OpenAPI <i>autogenerator</i>, and, now, this is my third job where I'm building an OpenAPI API in Elixir, so I got permission to open source our solution later this year.<p>Would have been nice to collaborate, but I guess Brex is leaving Elixir, so, there's that. They kind of had a bit of a reputation for not contributing much code back to the ecosystem =(
This is really cool to see. At the start of my YC batch, when I was still dabbling with building general accounting ledger systems as a service, I discovered that the GraphQL API Brex itself was using was, actually, pretty usable. Schema introspection worked. I was able to write scripts with it. Looks like they went with REST for the truly public one, but it's good to see it at all frankly.
I was wondering why Brex left Elixir, and what happened to all of the tooling they created to work in the language. From their blog[1]:<p>> Building and maintaining internal libraries to support Elixir as our primary backend language became time consuming, and few other users in the ecosystem seemed to share enough use cases to make OSS collaboration mutually beneficial.<p>The whole point of giving things, and contributing code, is to do it without the expectation of a return or that anyone will even use it. It’s the mystery and the surprise of the way in which others benefit that makes our <i>entire ecosystem</i> work. When companies ride on the volunteer labor of others to become worth billions, and then come up with all sorts of excuses for why they can’t give back... I guess the success of AWS demonstrates that nobody will care.<p>1: <a href="https://medium.com/brexeng/building-backend-services-with-kotlin-7c8410795e4b" rel="nofollow">https://medium.com/brexeng/building-backend-services-with-ko...</a>
I'm seeing a lot more APIs adding the "Bearer " prefix which I don't really understand. What's the point of it? This particular one doesn't even look like a "conventional" bearer token in the JWT sense.