You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to commits@fineract.apache.org by "edk12564 (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org> on 2026/03/08 22:36:05 UTC

[PR] FINERACT-2501: Added operationIds to Feign methods currently used in tests [fineract]

edk12564 opened a new pull request, #5597:
URL: https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597

   JIRA: FINERACT-2501
   
   ## Description
   
   According to FINERACT-2501, deduplication numbers in Feign client methods are unstable. More on this below.
   
   **The Problem**
   
   Fineract uses Swagger/OpenAPI to auto-generate Feign client methods from our endpoints. Since many endpoints share the same method name (e.g., retrieveAll()), Swagger appends a deduplication number to create unique operationIds. For example, retrieveAll35() for SavingsProductsApiResource.retrieveAll().
   
   These deduplication numbers are unstable. When a new endpoint with a duplicate name is added, the numbers can shift. In my testing, after adding a new dummy retrieveAll() endpoint, retrieveAll35() no longer pointed to SavingsProductsApiResource. It actually shifted to retrieveAll36().
   
   Since we hardcode these deduplicated method names in our Cucumber tests, any shift will silently call the wrong API, breaking tests.
   
   To start, the currently used Feign methods must be refactored, and the endpoints must have operationIds added to them. This is because changes in other modules will cause these in use methods to change due to instability. This results in build failures.
   
   ## Changes
   
   - added operationIds to all endpoints for Feign methods currently used in these
   - changed these first because changing other methods seems to break builds since these tests will shift due to items being taken out of the OpenApi spec
   
   The methodology for naming OperationIds is methodName + entityName + descriptionClause. For example, update() for SavingsProducts that creates using an externalId becomes updateSavingsProductsByExternalId. 
   
   ## Results
   
   All affected tests in integration and Cucumber tests pass.
   
   <img width="1263" height="349" alt="Screenshot 2026-03-08 at 5 19 54 PM" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/927699be-055e-445e-b632-2e6eccb6851f" />
   <img width="1304" height="250" alt="Screenshot 2026-03-08 at 5 25 16 PM" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8fca744a-1192-4946-9555-cbda3584e25b" />
   
   ## Checklist
   
   Please make sure these boxes are checked before submitting your pull request - thanks!
   
   - [ ] Write the commit message as per [our guidelines](https://github.com/apache/fineract/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md#pull-requests)
   - [ ] Acknowledge that we will not review PRs that are not passing the build _("green")_ - it is your responsibility to get a proposed PR to pass the build, not primarily the project's maintainers.
   - [ ] Create/update [unit or integration tests](https://fineract.apache.org/docs/current/#_testing) for verifying the changes made.
   - [ ] Follow our [coding conventions](https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FINERACT/Coding+Conventions).
   - [ ] Add required Swagger annotation and update API documentation at fineract-provider/src/main/resources/static/legacy-docs/apiLive.htm with details of any API changes
   - [ ] [This PR must not be a "code dump"](https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FINERACT/Pull+Request+Size+Limit). Large changes can be made in a branch, with assistance. Ask for help on the [developer mailing list](https://fineract.apache.org/#contribute).
   
   Your assigned reviewer(s) will follow our [guidelines for code reviews](https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FINERACT/Code+Review+Guide).
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@fineract.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org

Re: [PR] FINERACT-2501: Add operationIds and refactor feign methods to fix unstable deduplication numbers generated by swagger [fineract]

Posted by "Ambika-Sony (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.

Ambika-Sony commented on PR #5597:
URL: https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597#issuecomment-4048806504

    I’ll take a closer look at the deletion you pointed out in the review and
   restore the logic if it was removed accidentally during conflict resolution
   and Working on a single PR together sounds good to me as well. That should
   definitely help avoid duplicate changes and CI conflicts. I’ll sync with
   your latest updates and adjust my changes accordingly.
   
   On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 11:01 PM edk12564 ***@***.***> wrote:
   
   > *edk12564* left a comment (apache/fineract#5597)
   > <https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597#issuecomment-4048644723>
   >
   > Hi @Ambika-Sony <https://github.com/Ambika-Sony>, I took a look at your
   > PR. I think your tests are passing locally but failing on CI/CD because you
   > also need to push the changes to in-use feign methods that you pulled from
   > here. But considering this is the case, I wonder if we should just work on
   > this 1 PR together. This would prevent the issue of us pushing the same
   > code at the same time.
   >
   > What do you think about just working on this 1 PR together? I believe
   > Fineract allows multiple users to commits to a PR as long as long as there
   > is only 1 commit per user.
   >
   > I also saw a concerning deletion in your PR. Could you kindly take a look
   > at my review when you have time? I wonder if this was a mistake, since we
   > shouldn't be deleting logic for this type of change.
   >
   > *Hi,* I have consolidated my work for *FINERACT-2494* into a clean Pull
   > Request (*#5615 <https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5615>*). I’ve
   > merged the latest changes from upstream and resolved all local conflicts. I
   > wanted to flag a discrepancy I'm seeing: - *Locally:* ./gradlew
   > :fineract-client:compileJava passes successfully. - *On GitHub:* The
   > build is currently showing *34 failing checks*. Given the high number of
   > failures, I suspect there might be environment-related issues or broader
   > build instabilities. Could you please take a look at the PR when you have a
   > moment to see if these failures are related to my changes? Also, I wanted
   > to confirm the best approach for the unit tests: should I keep them under
   > *FINERACT-2494*, or would you prefer them moved to *FINERACT-2501*?
   > … <#m_-58939957042714022_>
   > On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 10:29 AM Ambika *@*.*> wrote: Hi , thank you for
   > the update! I am completely on board with splitting the work 50/50. I've
   > seen your latest push, Edward—I will pull those changes into my local
   > environment shortly to sync up. I'll continue working on my assigned
   > modules today. Great to be working with you both on this! On Thu, 12 Mar,
   > 2026, 8:04 am edk12564, @.*> wrote: > *edk12564* left a comment (
   > apache/fineract#5597 <https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597>) > <#5597
   > (comment)
   > <https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597#issuecomment-4043487572>> >
   > > sure. you can split ;) > > I see now after some reading that we can just
   > have 2 PRs since the tests > in our PR get run. Sorry about that. > > I
   > made a lot of progress, and build was working locally. However, I am > not
   > done yet. I am just pushing so @Ambika-Sony
   > <https://github.com/Ambika-Sony> > https://github.com/Ambika-Sony can
   > access these changes. Since they > are required to pass builds/tests. > > I
   > also found some endpoints in FinancialActivityAccountsApiResource that >
   > were named createGLAccount. However, it seems these endpoints actually map
   > > a GLAccount to a FinancialActivityAccount, and creating a GL Account is >
   > done in GLAccountResourceApi. I changed the operationId here to more >
   > closely match it's actual function. > > Thank you for being patient with
   > me! > > Also, before merging, we must also make sure the order with
   > Self-Service > removal is correct. Currently I left self-service changes
   > in. However, when > the full merge to delete goes through, i can refactor
   > to remove those > changes. Just depends on which gets merged first. > > — >
   > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#5597 (comment)
   > <https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597#issuecomment-4043487572>>,
   > > or unsubscribe >
   > https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BIN7S2GGRKMAB3DPNTFQBOD4QIO2XAVCNFSM6AAAAACWLGS4MSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHM2DANBTGQ4DONJXGI
   > > . > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: > *@*.***>
   > >
   >
   > —
   > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
   > <https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597#issuecomment-4048644723>,
   > or unsubscribe
   > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BIN7S2HAF22A57C7A6PA7VL4QLYAPAVCNFSM6AAAAACWLGS4MSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHM2DANBYGY2DINZSGM>
   > .
   > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
   > ***@***.***>
   >
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@fineract.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org

Re: [PR] FINERACT-2501: Add operationIds and refactor feign methods to fix unstable deduplication numbers generated by swagger [fineract]

Posted by "edk12564 (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.

edk12564 commented on PR #5597:
URL: https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597#issuecomment-4041283014

   > @edk12564 Would you mind to introduce operationId for ALL of our APIs, please?
   
   Of course! Would it be okay to have 2 PRs though between me and @Ambika-Sony . I have been communicating with her to split the tickets since she wanted to help out. We took a 50/50 split on modules earlier.


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@fineract.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org

Re: [PR] FINERACT-2501: Add operationIds and refactor feign methods to fix unstable deduplication numbers generated by swagger [fineract]

Posted by "edk12564 (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.

edk12564 commented on PR #5597:
URL: https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597#issuecomment-4058520509

   > @edk12564 @Ambika-Sony please rebase.
   
   Willdo!


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@fineract.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org

Re: [PR] FINERACT-2501: Add operationIds and refactor feign methods to fix unstable deduplication numbers generated by swagger [fineract]

Posted by "edk12564 (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.

edk12564 commented on PR #5597:
URL: https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597#issuecomment-4043487572

   > sure. you can split ;)
   
   I see now after some reading that we can just have 2 PRs since the tests in our PR get run. Sorry about that.
   
   I made a lot of progress, and build was working locally. However, I am not done yet. I am just pushing so @Ambika-Sony can access these changes. Since they are required to pass builds/tests. 
   
   I also found some endpoints in FinancialActivityAccountsApiResource that were named createGLAccount. However, it seems these endpoints actually map a GLAccount to a FinancialActivityAccount, and creating a GL Account is done in GLAccountResourceApi. I changed the operationId here to more closely match it's actual function.
   
   Thank you for being patient with me!
   
   Also, before merging, we must also make sure the order with Self-Service removal is correct. Currently I left self-service changes in. However, when the full merge to delete goes through, i can refactor to remove those changes. Just depends on which gets merged first. 


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@fineract.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org