Feature/Default expiration date for files

[Milena-Czierlinski]

No description provided.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on this repository.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[britsta]

• After merging this PR, will you adapt the documentation of the corresponding use case on enmeshed.eu (https://enmeshed.eu/use-case-transport-upload-own-file) or should someone else do it?
• When checking the FileDTO.ts and FileDVO.ts, I noticed that the optional description property was probably forgotten in the FileDVO. Perhaps this is the right opportunity to add this one line.

[britsta]

In the CreateTokenForFile.ts file and in the CreateTokenQRCodeForFile.ts file, I have noticed the line const defaultTokenExpiry = file.cache?.expiresAt ?? CoreDate.utc().add({ days: 12 });. Perhaps it is undesired if this constant is set to 9999 in case the default value for the expiresAt property of the File is used.

[Milena-Czierlinski]

After merging this PR, will you adapt the documentation of the corresponding use case on enmeshed.eu (https://enmeshed.eu/use-case-transport-upload-own-file) or should someone else do it?

Of course I will take care of this ;)

When checking the FileDTO.ts and FileDVO.ts, I noticed that the optional description property was probably forgotten in the FileDVO. Perhaps this is the right opportunity to add this one line.

I think the FileDVO is fine, since it extend DataViewObject, which possesses a description property.

[Milena-Czierlinski]

In the CreateTokenForFile.ts file and in the CreateTokenQRCodeForFile.ts file, I have noticed the line const defaultTokenExpiry = file.cache?.expiresAt ?? CoreDate.utc().add({ days: 12 });. Perhaps it is undesired if this constant is set to 9999 in case the default value for the expiresAt property of the File is used.

Well observed, that is a good question. It seems to me that file.cache.expiresAt should usually be set, since expiresAt is a required property. So, it should only be undefined, if we don't have any cached data. I'm not sure, when this would happen. So, currently I could set the expiration date of a file one or multiple years in the future. This would mean that the defaultTokenExpiry also covers this time range. Setting the expiry date of the file to a maximum value, why should there be a problem doing the same for the expiry date of the token?

[britsta]

Well observed, that is a good question. It seems to me that file.cache.expiresAt should usually be set, since expiresAt is a required property. So, it should only be undefined, if we don't have any cached data. I'm not sure, when this would happen. So, currently I could set the expiration date of a file one or multiple years in the future. This would mean that the defaultTokenExpiry also covers this time range. Setting the expiry date of the file to a maximum value, why should there be a problem doing the same for the expiry date of the token?

That's right, the value of 12 days as the defaultTokenExpiry should not currently be able to be used, which was already the case before. Nevertheless, it has made me think that such a short period of time is specified here as the default and such a distant year for the File with 9999. For security reasons, I could imagine that it would be better to have a shorter token validity by default, but I do not know much about tokens and whether it would also be conceivable to simply write 9999 too. Maybe someone else knows more about this.

[Milena-Czierlinski]

[BS] In the CreateTokenForFile.ts file and in the CreateTokenQRCodeForFile.ts file, I have noticed the line const defaultTokenExpiry = file.cache?.expiresAt ?? CoreDate.utc().add({ days: 12 });. Perhaps it is undesired if this constant is set to 9999 in case the default value for the expiresAt property of the File is used.

[MC] Well observed, that is a good question. It seems to me that file.cache.expiresAt should usually be set, since expiresAt is a required property. So, it should only be undefined, if we don't have any cached data. I'm not sure, when this would happen. So, currently I could set the expiration date of a file one or multiple years in the future. This would mean that the defaultTokenExpiry also covers this time range. Setting the expiry date of the file to a maximum value, why should there be a problem doing the same for the expiry date of the token?

[BS] That's right, the value of 12 days as the defaultTokenExpiry should not currently be able to be used, which was already the case before. Nevertheless, it has made me think that such a short period of time is specified here as the default and such a distant year for the File with 9999. For security reasons, I could imagine that it would be better to have a shorter token validity by default, but I do not know much about tokens and whether it would also be conceivable to simply write 9999 too. Maybe someone else knows more about this.

@jkoenig134 Do you have an opinion on this open discussion?

[jkoenig134]

@Milena-Czierlinski should be ok