This change will support many open and unanswered issues

springdoc/springdoc-openapi#510
springdoc/springdoc-openapi#1374
springdoc/springdoc-openapi#1568
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/71921999/java-annotation-based-validation-io-swagger-v3-oas-annotations-media-schema
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/44506965/jax-rs-group-validation-not-recognized-by-swagger-jax-rs-version-1-5-12
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/61461679/how-to-apply-constraints-with-javax-validation-constraints-groups-from-swagger-w
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/59477719/swagger-spring-boot-how-to-set-the-example-value-to-be-passed-in-the-api-base
https://community.smartbear.com/t5/Swagger-Open-Source-Tools/Support-validation-groups-when-reading-Java-annotations/td-p/199556
https://community.smartbear.com/t5/Swagger-Open-Source-Tools/Grouping-Schemas/m-p/201738
https://community.smartbear.com/t5/Swagger-Open-Source-Tools/How-to-generate-docs-for-api-under-particular-group/m-p/197721

That Pull-Request would be SO helpful as it fixes a major bug (and thus lot of issues).
I was so happy when I saw it, and I am watching it for 4months now, but sadly it never gets approved :(
How could we fasten the approval of the PR :) ?

I'm waiting on this too - it's maddening. I have a model class like this:

  @Schema(description = "Unique ksuid for this Event - returned on submission.", required = false)
  @NotEmpty(groups = {EventConsumerValidations.class})
  @Builder.Default
  private Optional<String> id = Optional.empty();

The idea is we want the validation after the object has been created with an id and not to have a client pass one in. I've tried required = false, I've tried a distinct @Schema annotation on the controller method that specifically omits that id field from the requiredProperties attribute. It's a huge omission. What is the hold-up with this PR?

I'm also looking forward to this.

Any updates on this PR? Is there something I can assist with to get this merged?

Any updates?

Do you have any updates on this?
Can I help with something in order to merge this? We really need this functionality.

Thank you in advance

Any updates?

This is a crucial functionality that would help many of us.
If there is anything that needs to be done before merging this PR, I propose for Maintainers to write the additional requirements.

I also find this very useful as it reduces unnecessary explanations. This is an example I created based on version 1.7.0 and using another project that beautifies the page. I hope the native project will support this feature soon.
knife4j-group, knife4j

Any updates for this?
Here is a solution for a problem sitting for 2 years, why is this still an issue?

Any updates ?
How does this PR still require review since 2022 ? There are discussions about this exact topic since at least 2020... 😐

Any updates ? How does this PR still require review since 2022 ? There are discussions about this exact topic since at least 2020... 😐

Indeed.... It's really necessary feature.... Workarounds are painful really for this...

Could we just know if this merge is being considered or is going to be closed, please?

Groups support has been added in #4853