global: system ingestion date

[jbenito3]

• Saves an ingestion date in the database. (closes api: expose system ingestion date in GET queries #7)
• Exposes that ingestion date in GET queries.

Signed-off-by: Jose Benito Gonzalez Lopez jose.benito.gonzalez@cern.ch

[jbenito3]

@tiborsimko I hope I understood correctly the ticket and it solves it.

[tiborsimko]

@jbenito3 Yes, sounds good. However I think we should modify the JSON schemas accordingly. From the client side, it is not "allowed" to set this field (or its setting would not have any effect). But from the server side, we need to return it in the response. Kind of like:

    {
      "claimant": "ADS",
      "received": "2015-08-27T11:23:58Z",
      "subject": {
          "type": "ARXIV_ID",
          "value": "astro-ph/0501001"
       },
      "claim": {
          "predicate": "is_same_as",
          "datetime": "2015-05-26T11:00:00Z",
          "certainty": 1,
      },
      "object": {
           "type": "ADS_BIBCODE",
           "value": "2005astro.ph..1001H"
      }
    }

Hence this received field should be probably optional in the JSON Schema for claims.

BTW if we want to distinguish these "system" fields from the rest of the claimed information, we could perhaps use some kind of prefix namespace convention, say:

      "__received__": "2015-08-27T11:23:58Z",

at a price of certain ugliness.

[jbenito3]

@tiborsimko That example you referred in your previous comment:

    {
      "claimant": "ADS",
      "received": "2015-08-27T11:23:58Z",
      "subject": {
          "type": "ARXIV_ID",
          "value": "astro-ph/0501001"
       },
      "claim": {
          "predicate": "is_same_as",
          "datetime": "2015-05-26T11:00:00Z",
          "certainty": 1,
      },
      "object": {
           "type": "ADS_BIBCODE",
           "value": "2005astro.ph..1001H"
      }
    }

Does it refer only to GET claims reply? Because at the moment the GET claims reply would be something like this:

{
    "json_list": [
        {
            "claim_details": {
                "claim": {
                    "arguments": {
                        "actor": "CDS_submission",
                        "human": "False"
                    },
                    "certainty": 100,
                    "datetime": "2015-05-25T11:00:00Z",
                    "predicate": "is_same_as"
                },
                "claimant": "CDS",
                "object": {
                    "type": "CDS_REPORT_NUMBER",
                    "value": "CMS-PAS-HIG-14-008"
                },
                "subject": {
                    "type": "CDS_RECORD_ID",
                    "value": "2001192"
                }
            },
            "created": "2015-05-25T11:00:00+00:00"
        }
    ]
}

I would definitely change, in my example, that created to received and datetime to created (also in the JSON schemas and RFC). What do you think?

BTW, I will get rid of that json_list in favor of something more meaningful.

[tiborsimko]

Does it refer only to GET claims reply?

Yes, I just modified the GET output example from the RFC.

BTW, I will get rid of that json_list in favor of something more meaningful.

Do we actually need it? Can be skipped out, returning only list of claims, if we put the system date "inside". Ditto for claim_details and friends that we could refactor. Simplifying the GET output structure can be part of another PR...

[jbenito3]

@tiborsimko Thanks for merging. I will take in to account your comments and implement the changes in my current task #23 (which is quite related).