Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: specialize ContractId only for offers, not agreements #3407

Conversation

ndr-brt
Copy link
Member

@ndr-brt ndr-brt commented Sep 1, 2023

What this PR changes/adds

Renamed ContractId to ContractOfferId and used it only for building/parsing contract offer ids, avoiding the use on ContractAgreement

Why it does that

Interoperability, furthermore contract agreement id does not need to contain information about the contract definition and asset id (the agreement itself already contains asset id and the whole policy)

Further notes

  • deprecated the old one

Linked Issue(s)

Closes #3403

Please be sure to take a look at the contributing guidelines and our etiquette for pull requests.

@ndr-brt ndr-brt added the bug Something isn't working label Sep 1, 2023
@ndr-brt ndr-brt force-pushed the 3403-avoid-using-contract-id-for-agreements branch from b3ec2a2 to c901bd7 Compare September 1, 2023 12:44
@ndr-brt ndr-brt force-pushed the 3403-avoid-using-contract-id-for-agreements branch from c901bd7 to c9281b0 Compare September 1, 2023 15:14
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 90.90% and project coverage change: -0.15% ⚠️

Comparison is base (28bcd41) 72.22% compared to head (c9281b0) 72.07%.

❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the GitHub App Integration for your organization. Read more.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3407      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   72.22%   72.07%   -0.15%     
==========================================
  Files         830      831       +1     
  Lines       16815    16828      +13     
  Branches      955      954       -1     
==========================================
- Hits        12144    12129      -15     
- Misses       4259     4288      +29     
+ Partials      412      411       -1     
Files Changed Coverage Δ
...iation/ConsumerContractNegotiationManagerImpl.java 99.00% <ø> (+2.77%) ⬆️
...iation/ProviderContractNegotiationManagerImpl.java 98.90% <ø> (+3.02%) ⬆️
...ipse/edc/policy/model/PolicyRegistrationTypes.java 0.00% <ø> (ø)
...eclipse/edc/connector/contract/spi/ContractId.java 0.00% <ø> (-88.24%) ⬇️
...ontract/spi/types/agreement/ContractAgreement.java 73.68% <0.00%> (-4.70%) ⬇️
...se/edc/connector/contract/spi/ContractOfferId.java 93.33% <93.33%> (ø)
...ract/validation/ContractValidationServiceImpl.java 86.11% <95.23%> (-0.38%) ⬇️
...pse/edc/connector/catalog/DatasetResolverImpl.java 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ferprocess/TransferProcessProtocolServiceImpl.java 98.91% <100.00%> (-0.05%) ⬇️

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@ndr-brt ndr-brt merged commit 1fcd8d0 into eclipse-edc:main Sep 4, 2023
18 checks passed
@ndr-brt ndr-brt deleted the 3403-avoid-using-contract-id-for-agreements branch September 4, 2023 06:38
ndkrimbacher pushed a commit to nexyo-io/DataSpaceConnector that referenced this pull request Oct 4, 2023
…-edc#3407)

fix: specialize ContractId only for offers, not agreements
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

ContractAgreement ID format shouldn't be in the ContractOffer ID format.
4 participants