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

fix(client): load local file variable #4594

Merged

Conversation

venetrius
Copy link
Member

related to: #4523

@venetrius
Copy link
Member Author

Based on the code base we only test basic functionalities for External Client so I have not added / updated any tests.
I have tested this manually.

Copy link
Member

@mboskamp mboskamp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍 Looks very nice already!
🔧 I added some minor suggestions.
❓ Do you think it makes sense to do further manual testing by QA?

@@ -84,4 +85,14 @@ public String toString() {
return "DeferredFileValueImpl [mimeType=" + mimeType + ", filename=" + filename + ", type=" + type + ", isTransient=" + isTransient + ", isLoaded=" + isLoaded + "]";
}

@Override
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🔧 Can we move the new getter and setter above the toString() method? This will be more consistent.
❓ Do you think it makes sense to include processInstanceId and executionId in the toString() result?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good points, thanks!

  • Moved the new getter and setter above the toString() method.
  • I think it can helpful when users use the toString() for debugging. Updated the toString() to include processInstanceId and executionId

Comment on lines 42 to 45
void setExecutionId(String executionId);

String getExecutionId();

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

❌ We should add Javadoc for interface methods.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added.

Copy link
Member

@mboskamp mboskamp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Awesome 👍

@venetrius venetrius merged commit f06cb96 into master Sep 16, 2024
2 checks passed
@venetrius venetrius deleted the 4523-exJTC-fix-unable-to-load-value-of-local-file-variable branch September 16, 2024 10:10
Copy link
Member

@tasso94 tasso94 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Two things I think we should reconsider to change: ❌

  1. Why do we expose setting and getting the execution ID to the user by adding these methods to the public API while we don't do it for the process instance ID?
  2. Tests are missing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants