Hacker News Reader

Comment by EnderMB | Hacker News Reader

Being able to claim requests together with such an easy to use interface is fantastic.

My only real gripe with Paw is that the default save mechanic produces a binary file. If you're providing paw files as documentation in a repo, this makes concurrent branches a pain because there's no ability to merge changes.

Unless I'm missing something? It's been a while since I've used it in anger.

View on HN

This is a huge complaint for me with most of these HTTP clients. I don't get why Git/VCS workflow is not considered in these applications. Imo, it needs to be first class.

This is the reason I still use Postman.

It's got a nice interface for throwing some HTTP requests around, but compared to the likes of Paw it's a pain in the ass to set up an API spec. Regardless, the ability to merge these files is too essential to use anything else.

Does Postman support this with Git? Last I saw with my team no one knew how. Only thing Postman seemed to have was a Cloud Sync and Merge junk, no one knew how to make it work with the git repo.

Thoughts?

Note that Paw has this type of cloud sync too, though I'm not sure how it handles merges.

It's been a while since I've had to do it, but I'm pretty sure that all you need to do is build a collection of your endpoints, and right-click -> export. This will save it as a JSON file, and while it's not pretty, it's importable and allows you to merge.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com