FINERACT-842 Made TRY-IT swagger button work

[thesmallstar]

This PR can only be merged after: #1163

[thesmallstar]

After #1163 is merged we only need to add the following code to fineract-input.yaml ( can be converted from json to yaml automatically)

servers:
- url: /fineract-provider/api/v1
components:
  securitySchemes:
    basicAuth:
      type: http
      scheme: basic 

And the try it button would work, I have tested this :D

[vorburger]

@ptuomola do you want to review and locally test this one? I'm happy to just merge it if it has your LGTM... (or even let this be one of the PRs that you can merge yourself, soon).

[vorburger]

BTW I don't suppose there's an easy better way for that SecurityRequirement annotation to be specified only once (perhaps programmatically?), instead of having to be specified everywhere? It's not a huge deal, and I don't mind merging it as is, but was just thinking that people may forget to add that in new *Resource classes for new APIs in the future. Or perhaps they won't, because they'll just copy/paste anyway.. ;-)

[thesmallstar]

With my basic knowledge on this( and a lot of research :P ) I could find the only this way to work.
I will search for a better option for this once more :D

[thesmallstar]

https://www.loom.com/share/8eb964074579491090db5bacbe5eff99

@vorburger @ptuomola I have a small demo video on how this works :)

The only problem I see is to give a proper error msg if the user try to access the API without authorizing.

[thesmallstar]

For the problem that if the user does not authorize, I think a better approach will be to have a the authorization parameters set by default to:
username: mifos
password: password

Since this would probably be used most (if not all) of the time for that username.
This, however, is not part of this PR and I would raise a separate PR for that purpose.

[thesmallstar]

Just noticed, Some API routes are not covered yet, converting to draft to avoid accidental merge.

[thesmallstar]

@vorburger there was an easier (and probably the correct way) to do this. I have updated this.
I have also added tenantid as an authorization param so that user can enter it if he wants.

By default, the user gets them set, and he can directly test the API :)

Ready for your review @ptuomola

[vorburger]

Oh! Wow. Ok, this is really cool... ;-) LGTM! I'd be (very) happy to merge this.. but haven't actually locally tested it myself - I'll let @ptuomola LGTM this.

[vorburger]

@thesmallstar wait but can the end-user actually CHANGE the uid/pwd (and - tenant) in the Swagg UI? That wasn't clear from the screenshot, to me.

[thesmallstar]

@vorburger yes, the initial values are only added for convenience since 90percent if the times we will probably need default id-pass and tenant.

[vorburger]

@thesmallstar could you remove this termsOfService as discussed in #1163 ?

[thesmallstar]

@ptuomola WDYT?

[ptuomola]

@thesmallstar Looks great to me! Tried it out locally and it works fine

[thesmallstar]

@vorburger this is ready to be merged 😄

[Sanyam96]

LGTM
Awesome work @thesmallstar