bug #930: added email property check, ensuring the correct response. #1066

dev-rahulbhadoriya · 2023-12-14T10:29:54Z

Closes #930

Added a check for the email field. If the property is missing or not included in the request body, an error 400.23 ( propertyNotFound) will be returned.

{
    "message": "Could not find a property named 'email'",
    "code": 400.23,
    "details": {
        "property": "email"
    }
}

What has been done to verify that this works as intended?

Tested with postman.

Why is this the best possible solution? Were any other approaches considered?

How does this change affect users? Describe intentional changes to behavior and behavior that could have accidentally been affected by code changes. In other words, what are the regression risks?

Does this change require updates to the API documentation? If so, please update docs/api.md as part of this PR.

Before submitting this PR, please make sure you have:

run make test-full and confirmed all checks still pass OR confirm CircleCI build passes
verified that any code from external sources are properly credited in comments or that everything is internally sourced

…onse.

matthew-white · 2023-12-20T03:20:41Z

Thanks, @dev-rahulbhadoriya! I have a couple of small suggestions. First, I think we should use Problem.user.missingParameter instead of propertyNotFound. Currently, we only use propertyNotFound when validating the $select OData query parameter, where the Problem means "you specified a property that doesn't exist." In other cases, it's more common that we use missingParameter, which has more of a meaning of "you didn't specify a parameter that we expected."

It'd be great if you could also add a test to test/integration/api/users.js for the new behavior. The test could send a request without email, then assert that the resulting response body has correct values for code and details.

Also, just FYI, the project is going to be quieter for the next couple of weeks. You may find that additional review is delayed until 2024. Thanks again for submitting this PR!

…ded test case.

dev-rahulbhadoriya · 2023-12-20T13:25:40Z

@matthew-white , thanks for the suggestions and for reviewing my PR. I have corrected the code and added a test case for it. Kindly check and review it

matthew-white · 2023-12-21T06:53:38Z

test/integration/api/users.js

+        it('should fail the request if email field is sent blank in request body', testService((service) =>
+          service.login('alice', (asAlice) =>
+            asAlice.post('/v1/users/reset/initiate')
+              .send({ email: '' })
+              .expect(400))));


Would you mind also adding assertions about the response body? code should equal 400.2, and details should equal { field: 'email' }.

can do something like this ?
it('should fail the request if email field is sent blank in request body', testService((service) => service.login('alice', (asAlice) => asAlice.post('/v1/users/reset/initiate') .send({ email: '' }) .expect(400) .then(({ body: { code, details } }) => { details.should.eql({ field: 'email' }); code.should.eql(400.2); }))));

bug getodk#930: added email property check, ensuring the correct resp…

09c05fb

…onse.

dev-rahulbhadoriya added 2 commits December 20, 2023 11:46

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin' into service_reset_initiate

4be1293

bug getodk#930: changed propertyNotFound to missingParameter, also ad…

b0c7988

…ded test case.

matthew-white reviewed Dec 21, 2023

View reviewed changes

added assertions about the response body

3fc9e69

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

bug #930: added email property check, ensuring the correct response. #1066

bug #930: added email property check, ensuring the correct response. #1066

dev-rahulbhadoriya commented Dec 14, 2023

matthew-white commented Dec 20, 2023 •

edited

dev-rahulbhadoriya commented Dec 20, 2023

matthew-white Dec 21, 2023

dev-rahulbhadoriya Dec 22, 2023

bug #930: added email property check, ensuring the correct response. #1066

Are you sure you want to change the base?

bug #930: added email property check, ensuring the correct response. #1066

Conversation

dev-rahulbhadoriya commented Dec 14, 2023

What has been done to verify that this works as intended?

Why is this the best possible solution? Were any other approaches considered?

How does this change affect users? Describe intentional changes to behavior and behavior that could have accidentally been affected by code changes. In other words, what are the regression risks?

Does this change require updates to the API documentation? If so, please update docs/api.md as part of this PR.

Before submitting this PR, please make sure you have:

matthew-white commented Dec 20, 2023 • edited

dev-rahulbhadoriya commented Dec 20, 2023

matthew-white Dec 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dev-rahulbhadoriya Dec 22, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

matthew-white commented Dec 20, 2023 •

edited