Skip to content

Added support for os2web_key #101

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

Open
wants to merge 63 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

rimi-itk
Copy link
Collaborator

@rimi-itk rimi-itk commented Apr 26, 2024

Caution

The feature/os2web_key branch in this pull request is branched from feature/code-cleanup and therefore the pull request Code clean-up #168 should be addressed – and merged – before code reviewing this pull request.

@rimi-itk rimi-itk force-pushed the feature/os2web_key branch 3 times, most recently from 1141148 to fc90fbe Compare May 1, 2024 15:07
@rimi-itk rimi-itk force-pushed the feature/os2web_key branch 3 times, most recently from 5ae3ae7 to b274156 Compare May 7, 2024 12:58
@rimi-itk rimi-itk marked this pull request as ready for review May 13, 2024 07:48
@rimi-itk rimi-itk changed the base branch from develop to 4.0.x May 13, 2024 08:43
@rimi-itk rimi-itk changed the base branch from 4.0.x to develop May 13, 2024 08:48
@rimi-itk rimi-itk requested a review from jekuaitk May 15, 2024 07:44
@rimi-itk rimi-itk force-pushed the feature/os2web_key branch from 37f77e4 to d82195e Compare May 16, 2024 07:35
… to get certificate.

# Conflicts:
#	CHANGELOG.md
#	composer.json
#	modules/os2forms_digital_post/src/Helper/CertificateLocatorHelper.php
#	modules/os2forms_digital_post/src/Helper/DigitalPostHelper.php
@jekuaitk jekuaitk requested a review from stankut April 24, 2025 12:43
@jekuaitk jekuaitk force-pushed the feature/os2web_key branch from c4fd652 to 6ba43e9 Compare April 24, 2025 13:33
Copy link
Collaborator

@stankut stankut left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi!

Most of my comments here are about how the changes are grouped. I see there have been a lot of refactoring changes—this is superb! However, these are currently mixed with new functionality, such as the addition of the os2web_key module, which makes the overall changeset look cluttered.

My suggestion is to try to keep different types of changes separate—perhaps by grouping them into two or three additional PRs.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We are updating/refactoring github workflow.
In my opinion it would clearer to make it as part of the separate/dedicated PR, not to mix it with new functionality.

.gitignore Outdated
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We are updating/refactoring general files in repository.
In my opinion it would clearer to make it as part of the separate/dedicated PR, not to mix it with new functionality.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We are updating/refactoring general files in repository.
In my opinion it would clearer to make it as part of the separate/dedicated PR, not to mix it with new functionality.

.markdownlintrc Outdated
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We are updating/refactoring general files in repository.
In my opinion it would clearer to make it as part of the separate/dedicated PR, not to mix it with new functionality.

CHANGELOG.md Outdated
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

if we are to keep the refactoring of the file not related with the new functionality (os2web_key), that must be reflected in CHANGELOG.
my suggestion is to make that as part of separate PR.

package.json Outdated
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We are updating/refactoring other files in repository (not related with os2web_key)
In my opinion it would clearer to make it as part of the separate/dedicated PR, not to mix it with new functionality.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We are updating/refactoring other files in repository (not related with os2web_key)
In my opinion it would clearer to make it as part of the separate/dedicated PR, not to mix it with new functionality.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We are updating/refactoring other files in repository (not related with os2web_key)
In my opinion it would clearer to make it as part of the separate/dedicated PR, not to mix it with new functionality.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We are updating/refactoring other files in repository (not related with os2web_key)
In my opinion it would clearer to make it as part of the separate/dedicated PR, not to mix it with new functionality.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We are updating/refactoring other files in repository (not related with os2web_key)
In my opinion it would clearer to make it as part of the separate/dedicated PR, not to mix it with new functionality.

# Conflicts:
#	.github/workflows/pr.yml
#	CHANGELOG.md
#	README.md
#	composer.json
#	modules/os2forms_dawa/src/Plugin/os2web/DataLookup/DatafordelerDataLookup.php
#	modules/os2forms_digital_post/src/Drush/Commands/DigitalPostTestCommands.php
@rimi-itk
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Hi!

Most of my comments here are about how the changes are grouped. I see there have been a lot of refactoring changes—this is superb! However, these are currently mixed with new functionality, such as the addition of the os2web_key module, which makes the overall changeset look cluttered.

My suggestion is to try to keep different types of changes separate—perhaps by grouping them into two or three additional PRs.

I totally agree, @stankut, and I cannot remember why I mixed everything together. I've moved the code cleanup stuff to a new pull request, #168.

@stankut stankut self-requested a review May 28, 2025 11:26
*/
function os2forms_fasit_update_9001(): void {
\Drupal::service('module_installer')->install([
'key',
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I did not find drupal/key to be present in this module composer nor in info.yml files.
it is however a dependency for os2web_key but that is too much of a uncertainty.

So here we have no guarantee that this module even exist in our installation. That can potentially lead to a situation where we are trying to enable a module we did not request.

suggestion: require it via composer/info.yml file OR remove the enabling via hook

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice catch, @stankut. I've updated the dependency in 2ecaa82. The os2forms_fasit module does not have its own composer.json file, but relies on the one from the parent module os2forms.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

idea was to remove refactoring to another PR (https://github.com/OS2Forms/os2forms/pull/168/files). I see it was done, but this is still marked as change for this PR

can you comment what is the idea here? Thanks

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@stankut, as mentioned under “Caution” in the pull request description, the branch for this pull request has feature/code-cleanup as base (to benefit from the code cleanup).

Therefore we (you or I) should merge #168 to get a more clean view on what's actually changed on in this pull request. I don't remember if I'm allowed to merge my own pull requests when approved or if you have to do it.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@rimi-itk got it!
i think everyone was merging their own requests after someone else has approved them.

I approved #168 some time ago. Can you please merge it?
ping me if for some reasons you cannot do it yourself

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I have merged #168, @stankut. #101 is now a little more clean.

README.md Outdated
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

idea was to remove refactoring to another PR (https://github.com/OS2Forms/os2forms/pull/168/files). I see it was done, but this is still marked as change for this PR

can you comment what is the idea here? Thanks

CHANGELOG.md Outdated
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

idea was to remove refactoring to another PR (https://github.com/OS2Forms/os2forms/pull/168/files). I see it was done, but this is still marked as change for this PR

can you comment what is the idea here? Thanks

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

idea was to remove refactoring to another PR (https://github.com/OS2Forms/os2forms/pull/168/files). I see it was done, but this is still marked as change for this PR

can you comment what is the idea here? Thanks

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

idea was to remove refactoring to another PR (https://github.com/OS2Forms/os2forms/pull/168/files). I see it was done, but this is still marked as change for this PR

can you comment what is the idea here? Thanks

@rimi-itk rimi-itk requested review from stankut and jekuaitk May 28, 2025 13:09
@@ -58,7 +58,8 @@
"itk-dev/serviceplatformen": "^1.5",
"mglaman/composer-drupal-lenient": "^1.0",
"os2web/os2web_audit": "^1.0",
"os2web/os2web_datalookup": "^2.0",
"os2web/os2web_datalookup": "dev-feature/os2web_key as 2.1.0",
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

shall we maybe merge os2web_datalookup before merging this PR?
then extra repository mention will not be needed

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, we should do that. This PR depends on many other PRs. I've requested a review from you on OS2web/os2web_datalookup#13.

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