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

Can create a flow without ID through REST API #3646

Closed
jstastny-cz opened this issue Sep 21, 2018 · 6 comments
Closed

Can create a flow without ID through REST API #3646

jstastny-cz opened this issue Sep 21, 2018 · 6 comments
Labels
cat/bug A bug which needs fixing group/server REST backend for managing integrations prio/p2 The priority of a bug. p1 means low source/qe Raised by QE

Comments

@jstastny-cz
Copy link

This is a bug.

User (through REST API) can create an Integration with Flow which doesn't have id specified. The Integration is created, and works well.
But when trying to edit the Integration through web interface, the flow is not visible after clicking 'Edit integration' and all the screen seems broken (no buttons or links).

Either the Flow id needs to be enforced via REST API, or web interface need to overcome this deficiency.

@pure-bot pure-bot bot added notif/triage The issue needs triage. Applied automatically to all new issues. progress/inbox labels Sep 21, 2018
@tplevko tplevko added source/qe Raised by QE cat/bug A bug which needs fixing group/server REST backend for managing integrations cat/design concrete UX design. Use this for PRs containing UX designs. and removed cat/design concrete UX design. Use this for PRs containing UX designs. labels Sep 25, 2018
@heiko-braun heiko-braun removed the notif/triage The issue needs triage. Applied automatically to all new issues. label Oct 10, 2018
@heiko-braun
Copy link
Collaborator

heiko-braun commented Oct 10, 2018

@zregvart @lburgazzoli What are your thoughts on this?

@heiko-braun heiko-braun added the prio/p2 The priority of a bug. p1 means low label Oct 10, 2018
@lburgazzoli
Copy link
Collaborator

There are quite a number of things that can go wrong by using the rest interface directly because as today most of the checks are done by the UI. As we do not expose the REST interface to users, I'm keen to see this as not a problem.

We need to revisit this once we decide to open the REST interface outside the UI.

@zregvart
Copy link
Member

#techdebt we should validate all parameters we receive via the REST API. A bunch of this we get with Immutables if we turn on JSR 303 validations.

@heiko-braun
Copy link
Collaborator

ok, thanks for the feedback. We leave it open for further consideration but will not (yet) act on it.

@heiko-braun
Copy link
Collaborator

@jstastny-cz I think this one of the areas where we would love to see contributions. If you can think about adding further constraints to the API parameters, I guess @zregvart can point you in the right direction.

@heiko-braun
Copy link
Collaborator

The API is for internal use only. Closing this for now.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cat/bug A bug which needs fixing group/server REST backend for managing integrations prio/p2 The priority of a bug. p1 means low source/qe Raised by QE
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants