FINERACT-2776: Add entitySubType to GetDataTablesResponse schema - #6307
Open
oluexpert99 wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
FINERACT-2776: Add entitySubType to GetDataTablesResponse schema#6307oluexpert99 wants to merge 1 commit into
oluexpert99 wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
POST /datatables accepts an entitySubType and the platform stores it in x_registered_table.entity_subtype. Both GET routes return it: DatatableData carries the field, and DatatableReadServiceImpl selects entity_subtype and passes it to DatatableData.create on the list path and the single-table path alike. The class both routes name as their @apiresponse schema does not declare it. PostDataTablesRequest does; GetDataTablesResponse does not. So the published document describes a datatable as having only applicationTableName, registeredTableName and columnHeaderData, and a caller can set a property that the documented response does not contain. Hand-written clients are unaffected, since the JSON has the field. Generated ones cannot read it at all. entitySubType scopes a datatable to a client legal form, so a client that renders custom fields on a customer needs it to tell whether a given table belongs on a person or on an entity. DatatableIntegrationTest already sets entitySubType on eleven datatable creations and never asserts it comes back, because the generated model has no getter for it. validateCreateAndEditDatatable now asserts the sub type it created the table with. fineract-client is generated from this spec, so that assertion does not compile before this change and passes after it. No runtime behaviour changes; the response was already correct. Signed-off-by: oluexpert99 <farooq@techservicehub.io>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
POST /datatables accepts an entitySubType and the platform stores it in x_registered_table.entity_subtype. Both GET routes return it: DatatableData carries the field, and DatatableReadServiceImpl selects entity_subtype and passes it to DatatableData.create on the list path and the single-table path alike.
The class both routes name as their @apiresponse schema does not declare it. PostDataTablesRequest does; GetDataTablesResponse does not. So the published document describes a datatable as having only applicationTableName, registeredTableName and columnHeaderData, and a caller can set a property that the documented response does not contain.
Hand-written clients are unaffected, since the JSON has the field. Generated ones cannot read it at all. entitySubType scopes a datatable to a client legal form, so a client that renders custom fields on a customer needs it to tell whether a given table belongs on a person or on an entity.
DatatableIntegrationTest already sets entitySubType on eleven datatable creations and never asserts it comes back, because the generated model has no getter for it. validateCreateAndEditDatatable now asserts the sub type it created the table with. fineract-client is generated from this spec, so that assertion does not compile before this change and passes after it.
No runtime behaviour changes; the response was already correct.
Description
Describe the changes made and why they were made. (Ignore if these details are present on the associated Apache Fineract JIRA ticket.)
Checklist
Please make sure these boxes are checked before submitting your pull request - thanks!
Your assigned reviewer(s) will follow our guidelines for code reviews.