APP-2814 SpringBoot Starter setup

[thibauult]

Description

This PR brings a very first integration of the BDK Core layer within a SpringBoot Starter module. Also, a BOM module (symphony-bdk-bom) has been created in order to simplify dependency management across the BDK project.

Example

An example application have been created in order to demonstrate how to implement a very simple Request/Reply Bot using the BDK SpringBoot Starter.

Only 2 files are required in order to setup the application:

• an application.yaml that contains the configuration of the Symphony environment (e.g. BdkConfig)
• a RequestReplyApplication.java main class that contains the Bot business logic

application.yaml

bdk:
   host: devx1.symphony.com
   bot:
    username: tibot
    privateKey: ${user.home}/local/conf/agent/privateKey.pem

RequestReplyApplication.java

@SpringBootApplication
public class RequestReplyApplication implements RealTimeEventsListener {

  @Autowired
  private MessageService messageService;

  @Override
  public void onMessageSent(V4MessageSent event) {
    this.messageService.send(event.getMessage().getStream(),"<messageML>Hello, from Spring!</messageML>");
  }

  public static void main(String[] args) { SpringApplication.run(RequestReplyApplication.class, args); }
} 

[symphony-youri]

+1 on reusing the same format

[symphony-youri]

idea for later, provide properties documentation with https://docs.spring.io/spring-boot/docs/current/reference/html/appendix-configuration-metadata.html
and validation with javax.validation

[thibauult]

Already in place actually : https://github.com/SymphonyPlatformSolutions/symphony-api-client-java/pull/186/files#diff-ff7ac3e8e0ec4f8c75d855be89102922R201 but I need to rework on the configuration bean

[symphony-youri]

In that case do we want to make them bean and put them in the context? (vs creating them manually where needed, i.e in BdkServiceConfig

[thibauult]

I think that : "just in case", I'd feel more confident to have them injected in the context.

Actually, I already imagine a customer request saying: "oh we need to call this API (such as DLP, Security...) but the service does not already exists". In this situation we could easily reply by : OK you just have to inject this bean and this bean and you'll be able to proceed to the API call, the service layer will come later.

Maybe I should refine this Javadoc comment

[symphony-youri]

ok, I'll guess we won't document that they exist then

[symphony-youri]

just to make stacktraces easier to read we would use Thread.currentThread().setName(); (or use a custom thread factory) to set a meaningful thread's name

[symphony-youri]

Do you keep a wish list somewhere for the BDK where we could track ideas and improvements?

[symphony-hong]

LGTM!