Add basic level policy support to Ditto Java Client #46
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Dominik Guggemos <dominik.guggemos@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
…om/stash/scm/ditto/ditto-clients into feature/policy-protocol Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
…atibility Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
…Thing, as an already existing Thing can never get a new initial Policy Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
…ied Policy Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
…gMessageFactory Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
…ions instead of implementing own helper methods Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
…hingCommand Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
…om/stash/scm/ditto/ditto-clients into feature/policy-protocol Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
…egrationTest. Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
…d classes. Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
…ponse forwarding Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Dominik Guggemos <dominik.guggemos@bosch-si.com>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
| * @throws org.eclipse.ditto.model.things.ThingIdInvalidException if the {@code thingId} was invalid. | ||
| * @since 1.1.0 | ||
| */ | ||
| CompletableFuture<Thing> create(JsonObject thing, JsonObject initialPolicy, Option<?>... options); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a particular reason why the create and put methods with initialPolicy all only provide JsonObject instead of a Policy object?
That would be way more convenient to use IMO. Either in addition to the JsonObject or maybe even replacing it.
Also some have the initialPolicy param @Nullable, others don't. Is that intentionally?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Providing create and put methods with initialPolicy using a Policy object is a good point. I include this in addition to the existing possibilities.
The methods with the @Nullable once in put and in the create method are called by all other put and create methods. This is where the actual processing takes place.
Maybe it would be better to introduce a private method which does the processing? This would remove the @Nullable from the two public put and create methods.
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
| * Thing}. | ||
| * @throws org.eclipse.ditto.model.things.ThingIdInvalidException if the {@code thingId} was invalid. | ||
| */ | ||
| CompletableFuture<Thing> create(JsonObject thing, Option<?>... options); |
| * @return completable future providing the created Thing object or a specific {@link | ||
| * org.eclipse.ditto.model.base.exceptions.DittoRuntimeException} if the operation failed | ||
| */ | ||
| CompletableFuture<Thing> create(Policy initialPolicy, Option<?>... options); |
| * | ||
| * @param options options to be applied configuring behaviour of this method, see {@link | ||
| * org.eclipse.ditto.client.options.Options}. | ||
| * @param initialPolicy a custom policy to use for the Thing instead of the default Policy. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the intialPolicy param should be documented before the options param - in order of their appearance in the signature
| CompletableFuture<Thing> create(JsonObject thing, Option<?>... options); | ||
|
|
||
| /** | ||
| * Creates an empty {@link Thing} with an auto-generated identifier. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe add "with an auto-generated identifier" and an initial Policy?
| * @throws org.eclipse.ditto.model.things.ThingIdInvalidException if the {@code thingId} was invalid. | ||
| * @since 1.1.0 | ||
| */ | ||
| CompletableFuture<Thing> create(Thing thing, final Policy initialPolicy, Option<?>... options); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In interface signatures we don't use final, please remove from the Policy param
| * @throws org.eclipse.ditto.model.base.exceptions.DittoJsonException if {@code thing} cannot be parsed to a {@link | ||
| * Thing}. | ||
| */ | ||
| CompletableFuture<Optional<Thing>> put(JsonObject thing, Option<?>... options); |
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
| * @return completable future providing the created Thing object or a specific {@link | ||
| * org.eclipse.ditto.model.base.exceptions.DittoRuntimeException} if the operation failed | ||
| * @since 1.0.0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
since 1.0.0? Don't think so ;)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That was a typo combined with copy + paste... I will fix that
| @@ -326,6 +328,7 @@ | |||
| * {@code "thingId"}. | |||
| * @throws org.eclipse.ditto.model.base.exceptions.DittoJsonException if {@code thing} cannot be parsed to a {@link | |||
| * Thing}. | |||
| * @since 1.0.0 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
was this method already in 1.0.0?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The interface method put(JsonObject thing, Option<?>... options) was already there from the beginning. So imo @since 1.0.0 must be right
Signed-off-by: Vadim Guenther <vadim.guenther@bosch-si.com>
ffendt
force-pushed
the
feature/policy-protocol
branch
from
226ce0e
to
5217b27
Compare
|
I fixed the ECA check but the build will keep failing until we have a Ditto version that provides |
…ity check version to 1.1.0-M2 Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
… check should only be done against real releases Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
…ree" Signed-off-by: Florian Fendt <Florian.Fendt@bosch.io>
Basic Policy management over Ditto Java Client. Includes create, read, update and delete a Policy.
Also when creating a Thing inline Policy as well as copy Policy is supported. (See: https://www.eclipse.org/ditto/protocol-examples-creatething.html#alternative-creatething-commands)