Refactor preparePutOrPost in HttpJdkSolrClient

[andywebb1975]

Description

This refactors the preparePutOrPost method in HttpJdkSolrClient to make the code clearer, and remove the previous unreachable else block.

Tests

All tests still pass.

Checklist

Please review the following and check all that apply:

• I have reviewed the guidelines for How to Contribute and my code conforms to the standards described there to the best of my ability.
• I have created a Jira issue and added the issue ID to my pull request title.
• I have given Solr maintainers access to contribute to my PR branch. (optional but recommended)
• I have developed this patch against the main branch.
• I have run ./gradlew check.
• I have added tests for my changes.
• I have added documentation for the Reference Guide

[andywebb1975]

I'm unclear when this would kick in - it can't trigger if urlParamNames is null.

[jdyer1]

Indeed urlParamNames is never null (see HttpSolrClientBase constructor line 107ff), so the null check is spurious. Should you comment-out line 306, you will see testQueryString fail in the case where there are query parameters but nothing was set for urlParamNames (using the withTheseParamNamesInTheUrl option).

[andywebb1975]

queryParams can't be null either, can it? I've made this the else block - I added an UnsupportedOperationException in the original noBody() one and saw it was never triggered by tests. Does this change look good to you?

[jdyer1]

Well, you are right, it does not seem urlParams or queryParams can ever be null. So you're correct, the "noBody" case never gets touched. I guess I had thought there would be a case where we would could post with an empty body but clearly this cannot happen.

[dsmiley]

Shall this be merged?

[andywebb1975]

@jdyer1 does this look OK to you? The tests pass but I'm not totally familiar with the use case to know that this is definitely correct.

(It's not a bug so I'd be happy to target 9.7.0 with this if we merge it.)

[jdyer1]

@jdyer1 does this look OK to you? The tests pass...

I think your changes are valid and if all existing tests still pass then its a win. I am all in favor of no dead code branches!