Add wiremock module

[mcruzdev]

Many thanks for submitting your Pull Request ❤️!

Please make sure that your PR meets the following requirements:

• You have read the contributors guide
• Your code is properly formatted according to our code style
• Pull Request title contains the target branch if not targeting main: [0.9.x] Subject
• Pull Request contains link to the issue
• Pull Request contains link to any dependent or related Pull Request
• Pull Request contains description of the issue
• Pull Request does not include fixes for issues other than the main ticket

How to backport a pull request to a different branch?

In order to automatically create a backporting pull request please add one or more labels having the following format backport-<branch-name>, where <branch-name> is the name of the branch where the pull request must be backported to (e.g., backport-quarkus2 to backport the original PR to the quarkus2 branch).

NOTE: backporting is an action aiming to move a change (usually a commit) from a branch (usually the main one) to another one, which is generally referring to a still maintained release branch. Keeping it simple: it is about to move a specific change or a set of them from one branch to another.

Once the original pull request is successfully merged, the automated action will create one backporting pull request per each label (with the previous format) that has been added.

If something goes wrong, the author will be notified and at this point a manual backporting is needed.

NOTE: this automated backporting is triggered whenever a pull request on main branch is labeled or closed, but both conditions must be satisfied to get the new PR created.

[mcruzdev]

Hi @hbelmiro and @ricardozanini I created the wiremock module, what initial features we need to have to merge to main?

Is it possible to create a branch for wiremock stuff, or just adding an initial feature is ok for now?

[github-actions]

🎊 PR Preview 4cde6ca has been successfully built and deployed. See the documentation preview: https://quarkus-openapi-generator-preview-pr-648.surge.sh

[hbelmiro]

@mcruzdev

what initial features we need to have to merge to main?

From us, you're probably the one who knows more about it. I'll let you decide.
Is this wiremock support a real need for you as a user? If so, what are the ones you need the most? From those, pick the easiest/fastest to implement.

Is it possible to create a branch for wiremock stuff, or just adding an initial feature is ok for now?
IMO, we can add features incrementally (an initial feature is ok), so users can benefit from them ASAP.

[mcruzdev]

Hi @hbelmiro, Thank you!

It help me a lot, I will continue here!

[mcruzdev]

• Add response status from OpenAPI
• Add response body from OpenAPI (without to get from components)

[mcruzdev]

Hi @hbelmiro and @ricardozanini, I think that we can get a first review about this new feature.

[ricardozanini]

I'd rather wait for #482 to be merged first. @carlesarnal will kick my ass if I keep asking him to rebase.

[ricardozanini]

Just a few comments initially, I'll do a better review later.

[mcruzdev]

Just a few comments initially, I'll do a better review later.

I switched the extension to experimental Sound good?

I've added some basic features for starters. It is great for new contributors!

[ricardozanini]

@mcruzdev can you rebase? 🙏

[ricardozanini]

@mcruzdev are the issues pointed by GH relevant?

[mcruzdev]

@mcruzdev are the issues pointed by GH relevant?

Sorry for delay!

I think we can ignore because are Test classes. makes sense?

Unused class: SchemaReaderTest is not referenced within this codebase. If not used as an external API it should be removed.

[hbelmiro]

Good job and amazing contribution @mcruzdev. Thank you!
I left some comments.

[mcruzdev]

Hi @hbelmiro thank you for the reviewing it, I will solve all soon!

[hbelmiro]

@mcruzdev can you please let me know when I can re-review it?

[mcruzdev]

Hi @hbelmiro, I think you can review it now! When all things are ok I will do the squash

[hbelmiro]

We can remove the Map parameter of mapObjectExample.
By doing this, we avoid modifying objects passed as an argument, increasing the code's immutability.
Like this:

    static String readObjectExample(Schema<?> schema) {
        try {
            Map<String, Object> map = mapObjectExample(schema);
            return OpenApiWiremockGeneratorWrapper.OBJECT_MAPPER_INSTANCE.writeValueAsString(map);
        } catch (JsonProcessingException e) {
            return EMPTY_JSON_OBJECT;
        }
    }

    private static Map<String, Object> mapObjectExample(Schema<?> example) {
        HashMap<String, Object> root = new HashMap<>();
        Optional.ofNullable(example.getProperties()).orElse(Map.of())
                .forEach((key, schema) -> {
                    if (schema.getType().equals(OBJECT_TYPE)) {
                        root.put(key, mapObjectExample(schema));
                    } else {
                        root.put(key, schema.getExample());
                    }
                });
        return root;
    }

[mcruzdev]

Hi @hbelmiro and @ricardozanini I think we can wait for merge this pull request, I am seeing here some projects that does similar things and I am collecting some ideas to use here... Another point is: I am very busy and I think if we merge it we will not have effort to upgrade this module faster. WDYT?