-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54k
BAEL-6572: Added mapping for id and test, based on review comment #14712
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
e4d766b
BAEL-6572: Added mapping for id and test, based on review comment
balasr3 527c797
BAEL-6572: Added setter for id
balasr3 573f511
BAEL-6572: Modified test to validateId mapping
balasr3 078a093
BAEL-6572: Modified test to validateId mapping
balasr3 2b422a9
BAEL-6572: Removed lombok on License model
balasr3 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Instead of modifying each existing test, add a new test just for the id field. In that test, set the id in the LicenseDto, then assert the same id is present in the License after mapping.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done but I have just validated that it's not null since the mapping is not based on licenseDto, as per my mapping example its populated with a random UUID as usually this will be decided during persistence. Please let me know if any comments
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Which class are you suggesting would have the UUID automatically populated by the persistence layer, both the License and the LicenseDto?
In my mind, I thought that the LicenseDto was (as a Data Transfer Object) was the object that would be persisted, and the License is the domain object that is mapped to/from the LicenseDto.
The flow I would usually expect is:
Did you have something different in mind? What scenario is there when the License and LicenseDto would have a different automatically generated UUID?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@theangrydev Apologies for the confusion, its been a while I wrote this and I thought of something else but now realised mapper is different. Yes you are right, licenseDto is the input and we map it to domain object License so we will get Id from the licenseDto. I have modified the PR accordingly