Use relative protocol rather than fixed for basePath

[billinghamj]

No description provided.

[slnode]

Can one of the admins verify this patch? To accept patch and trigger a build add comment ".ok\W+to\W+test."

[bajtos]

@slnode ok to test

[bajtos]

@billinghamj Thank you for the pull request. Could you please explain what problem/use case are you trying to solve? I am not sure if a protocol-relative URL is valid according to Swagger specification, have you checked the spec?

@shelbys the hardcoded protocol was added to support your use case via #61. Will the implementation proposed here work for you too?

[shelbys]

@bajtos - We've long-since been using x-forwarded-proto in our fork, so this change makes sense to me. See: https://github.com/shelbys/loopback-explorer/blob/master/lib/swagger.js#L119

[billinghamj]

@bajtos The problem for us is when doing reverse proxying, via a system we don't have control over, the x-forwarded-proto header is not correctly set. When we browse to the explorer, the URLs are not correctly generated.

Relative protocols will work in all cases - based on the current browser context.

[bajtos]

@billinghamj I see, it makes sense. I am still reluctant to land this patch as it is, as I am concerned that it may break backwards compatibility.

I am proposing the following solution that should allow you to implement what you need, while preserving current behaviour for existing users:

var proto = opts.omitProtocolInBaseUrl  ?  '//' :
  (headers['x-forwarded-proto'] || opts.protocol || req.protocol) + '://';
var host = headers['x-forwarded-host'] || headers.host;
doc.basePath = proto + host + initialPath;

Usage

app.use('/explorer', explorer(app, { omitProtocolInBaseUrl: true }));

Thoughts?

I'll also need you to add a unit-test to verify the new behaviour, see the existing tests for inspiration: https://github.com/strongloop/loopback-explorer/blob/ccfd9c42b08e30e8ea6564735827940c519db308/test/swagger.test.js#L73-L107

[slnode]

Can one of the admins verify this patch? To accept patch and trigger a build add comment ".ok\W+to\W+test."

[bajtos]

@slnode test please

[billinghamj]

Yes that works for me.

[bajtos]

Yes that works for me.

@billinghamj great! could you then update the pull request please?

[bajtos]

Closing in favour of #102.

[slnode]

Can one of the admins verify this patch? To accept patch and trigger a build add comment ".ok\W+to\W+test."