typeInformation contain global config values

[KeshavSoni2511]

Fix for issue #1515

[AlvaroVega]

Could you please include the simplification of blocks referenced in #1515 (comment) ?

[KeshavSoni2511]

Could you please include the simplification of blocks referenced in #1515 (comment) ?

Hi @AlvaroVega, I have done & tested the simplication in

iotagent-node-lib/lib/services/ngsi/entities-NGSI-v2.js

Lines 304 to 309 in d1586fb

	const mustInsertTimeInstant =
	typeInformation.timestamp !== undefined
	? typeInformation.timestamp
	: config.getConfig().timestamp !== undefined
	? config.getConfig().timestamp
	: false;

to

but test case httpBindings-test.js was failing.

The issue can be fixed by adding attribute "timestamp": "true" in provisionDeviceProduction.json. In case of iotagent-json it works without any test case failure.

Please confirm if this change is required or you have any other suggestion.

[KeshavSoni2511]

Could you please include the simplification of blocks referenced in #1515 (comment) ?

Hi @AlvaroVega, I have done & tested the simplication in

iotagent-node-lib/lib/services/ngsi/entities-NGSI-v2.js

Lines 304 to 309 in d1586fb

	const mustInsertTimeInstant =
	typeInformation.timestamp !== undefined
	? typeInformation.timestamp
	: config.getConfig().timestamp !== undefined
	? config.getConfig().timestamp
	: false;

to

but test case httpBindings-test.js was failing.

The issue can be fixed by adding attribute "timestamp": "true" in provisionDeviceProduction.json. In case of iotagent-json it works without any test case failure.

Please confirm if this change is required or you have any other suggestion.

Hi @AlvaroVega, please review my understanding. Thanks

[fgalan]

Hi @AlvaroVega, please review my understanding. Thanks

It seems there is a conflict on CHANGES_NEXT_RELEASE. This has to be solved (it's easy :) before merging.

[AlvaroVega]

Could you please include the simplification of blocks referenced in #1515 (comment) ?

Hi @AlvaroVega, I have done & tested the simplication in

iotagent-node-lib/lib/services/ngsi/entities-NGSI-v2.js

Lines 304 to 309 in d1586fb

	const mustInsertTimeInstant =
	typeInformation.timestamp !== undefined
	? typeInformation.timestamp
	: config.getConfig().timestamp !== undefined
	? config.getConfig().timestamp
	: false;

to

but test case httpBindings-test.js was failing.
The issue can be fixed by adding attribute "timestamp": "true" in provisionDeviceProduction.json. In case of iotagent-json it works without any test case failure.
Please confirm if this change is required or you have any other suggestion.

Hi @AlvaroVega, please review my understanding. Thanks

Good news about iotagent-json tests works without any modifications after simplifying checks in iotagent-node-lib. I've see not problem in perform another PR to modify iotagent-ul tests in the way you describe (change timestamp to false in https://github.com/telefonicaid/iotagent-ul/blob/master/test/deviceProvisioning/provisionDeviceProduction.json and complete current PR with the simplifications in related checks

[KeshavSoni2511]

Good news about iotagent-json tests works without any modifications after simplifying checks in iotagent-node-lib. I've see not problem in perform another PR to modify iotagent-ul tests in the way you describe (change timestamp to false in https://github.com/telefonicaid/iotagent-ul/blob/master/test/deviceProvisioning/provisionDeviceProduction.json and complete current PR with the simplifications in related checks

Hi @AlvaroVega, I have performed iotagent-ul test with "timestamp": "true" in https://github.com/telefonicaid/iotagent-ul/blob/master/test/deviceProvisioning/provisionDeviceProduction.json as global config value contain "timestamp": "true" and test case passed with the proposed change. Please confirm my understanding if I can proceed further and raise another PR on iotagent-ul. Please confirm if you have any other suggestion. Thanks

[AlvaroVega]

Good news about iotagent-json tests works without any modifications after simplifying checks in iotagent-node-lib. I've see not problem in perform another PR to modify iotagent-ul tests in the way you describe (change timestamp to false in https://github.com/telefonicaid/iotagent-ul/blob/master/test/deviceProvisioning/provisionDeviceProduction.json and complete current PR with the simplifications in related checks

Hi @AlvaroVega, I have performed iotagent-ul test with "timestamp": "true" in https://github.com/telefonicaid/iotagent-ul/blob/master/test/deviceProvisioning/provisionDeviceProduction.json as global config value contain "timestamp": "true" and test case passed with the proposed change. Please confirm my understanding if I can proceed further and raise another PR on iotagent-ul. Please confirm if you have any other suggestion. Thanks

Yes, you can proced it with another PR for iotagent-ul

[fgalan]

LGTM

[fgalan]

Thanks for the contribution!