Generated c# interface for Client with internal modifier on DTO classes should be internal too

[jonnybi]

A public interface ist generated for a client that has access modifier set to internal and DTO classes have access modifier internal too.
The generated interface should have internal modifier too.

[RicoSuter]

The problem is that internal (or any fine grained modifieres) cannot be expressed by Swagger/JSON Schema...

[bangonkali]

Interesting. We could generate multiple results instead, one carrying the Swagger/Json Schema and the other is an optional file containing information regarding access modifiers.

[RicoSuter]

I think it would be better to implement a custom json schema processor class (NJsonSchema) which adds a new property (extension, via ExtensionData), eg ‘x-modifier’ and extend the template engine so that you can easily modify the modifieres with a custom extension...

[RicoSuter]

Ping me if you have time to help here... thx

[PolaEdward]

If the DTOs are being generated as internal, then the interface should follow the same, otherwise you will get
[CS0050] Inconsistent accessibility: return type....
So the simple fix is to use whatever access modifier used for DTOs for the interface also.

[jmevel]

Any update on this one?

[pbolduc]

I think this file Client.Interface.liquid would need to use the TypeAccessModifier (The DTO class/enum access modifier). However, I was unable find the code/template that generates the DTO model types to verify the correct variable. Where are the models generated?

@RicoSuter Does this make sense? If this change was added would it be accepted in a PR? Did I identify the the correct variable that can be updated in the interface template reference? The interface must have at most the same level of access modified as the models it uses.

[pbolduc]

Access Modifiers

Valid Modifiers:

• public
• internal

Invalid Modifiers

All of these modifieds will error out with CS1527 Elements defined in a namespace cannot be explicitly declared as private, protected, protected internal, or private protected

• private
• protected
• protected internal
• private protected

Combinations

valid	class	model	interface
Yes	public	public	public	used when not granting access to the class, only the interface/types
Yes	public	public	internal	use case?
No	public	internal	public	Model is less accessible than method
No	public	internal	internal	Model is less accessible than method
Yes	internal	public	public	used when not granting access to the class, only the interface/types
Yes	internal	public	internal	used when you just want to expose the models
No	internal	internal	public	Model is less accessible than method
Yes	internal	internal	internal	used when hiding the generated client inside an assembly, by exposing a manually written service wrapping the calls

[jmevel]

Hi,

@RicoSuter or anyone else with enough rights on this repo, would that be possible to have a look at #4820 and see what's going on with the Macos build?

PR is (I think) ready to be merged but is stuck because of this...

Thanks a lot 🙏

[lahma]

MacOS build failures should be fixed by #4896 , but it's not necessary to accept pending PRs. I should be OK if both Ubuntu and Windows build succeed.

[jmevel]

Ok that's good news.
#4896 is quite a big PR 😳

Thanks for your fast reply !