Implement GitHub App API methods #522

PauloMigAlmeida · 2019-06-11T05:39:34Z

This PR implements the GitHub Apps API workflow. Things to be noted:

I assumed that JWT is encoded externally and its JWT token is passed as a parameter to be used as an authentication mechanism (like it's done with the OAuth token currently). Implementing JWT encoding logic seemed too cumbersome for the project's value proposition (IMHO)
Methods that can only be requested via JWT as part of the Github App workflow are documented
On the Requester class, I had to make the with(String key, Collection<String> value) more generic as just adding another method like with(String key, Collection<Integer> value) wouldn't do the trick...and adding a specific method for this seemed weird...but let me know if you want to have this implemented in another way or if you're fine with the approach taken.

If you find that this contribution is a good addition to the project, please accept this PR.

Best regards,

ghost · 2019-06-11T05:39:40Z

DeepCode analyzed this pull request.
There is 1 new info report.

Click to see more details.

…is still in preview

PauloMigAlmeida · 2019-06-11T23:32:30Z

Added @Preview and @deprecated annotations to methods in which the API is still in preview

PauloMigAlmeida · 2019-07-02T11:32:30Z

ping @kohsuke @bitwiseman

Hi guys, is there anything I can do to make this PR mergeable?

webratz · 2019-07-25T14:35:21Z

would really ❤️ to see that merged, as its a pre-requisite to make Jenkins a GitHub App, which would help a lot, especially for bigger setups, see also https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-57351

bitwiseman · 2019-08-07T16:26:01Z

@PauloMigAlmeida
My apologies for the delay. I've been buried under other work and I will be for at least another couple weeks, but make the time to be responsive to this discussion.

This looks reasonable to me from cursory review. The Requester change isn't an API break, right? If so, that also seem fine.

I'm new to this project and very uncomfortable with how little testing it includes, but I also understand how testing is difficult in this area.

Can you see any way to add more tests for these changes API? I would be far more comfortable if there were.

PauloMigAlmeida · 2019-08-07T21:26:31Z

@bitwiseman
No problem at all and thanks for taking the time to take a look at this PR

This looks reasonable to me from cursory review. The Requester change isn't an API break, right? If so, that also seems fine.

You're correct. This doesn't break backwards API compatibility.

Can you see any way to add more tests for these changes API? I would be far more comfortable if there were.

Absolutely! I think I can develop something using MockServer to mimic Github server responses and ensure that those new methods work as expected. Let me know if you have another strategy for testing it that you want me to follow.

I will ping you once I've finished it (probably around tomorrow)

bitwiseman · 2019-08-08T03:14:57Z

@PauloMigAlmeida
The only thing we have in this area is #316 and #382.

One of the clients of this library, the Jenkins github-branch-source-plugin has a number of WireMock-based tests, but I would be happy to see any reasonable set of automated tests.

Add wiremock-standalone library; Signed-off-by: Paulo Almeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@gmail.com>

PauloMigAlmeida · 2019-08-10T07:08:57Z

@bitwiseman
I read the threads you mentioned and in both cases, it seems to boil down to the reference implementation on the github-branch-source-plugin.

Having said that, I implemented the tests using canned HTTP responses (WireMock-based tests). Let me know if you want me to change anything else before merging it.

PauloMigAlmeida · 2019-08-14T10:34:42Z

ping @bitwiseman

# Conflicts: # pom.xml

PauloMigAlmeida · 2019-08-26T00:35:02Z

ping @bitwiseman

Let me know if there is anything you want me to change in order to get this approved.

PS.: I saw that given the last few merges you did on the master branch caused this PR to conflict, so I just merged with the most up-to-date commit.

Signed-off-by: Paulo Almeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@gmail.com>

bitwiseman · 2019-09-10T00:34:33Z

@PauloMigAlmeida
I haven't had time to do a deep review, but generally this looks reasonable.

I have made a mocking framework that should simplify your tests some - each test method gets it's only directory which should mean you don't have to read each payload. Could you move this to use that structure and then I can do a final review?

Why do most of the methods have @Preview @Deprecated on them?

bitwiseman

Update based on new test framework needed.

PauloMigAlmeida · 2019-09-11T21:58:56Z

Hi @bitwiseman, all good.

Sure, I can definitely update my tests to follow the new test framework. I will probably do it tomorrow. Stay tuned 😊

In regards to the preview/deprecated annotations, that’s a solution proposed by kohsuke for dealing with github preview apis.

It is documented here: https://github.com/github-api/github-api/blob/master/src/main/java/org/kohsuke/github/Preview.java

If that doesn’t apply anymore, let me know and I will gladly remove them

bitwiseman · 2019-09-12T05:08:46Z

@PauloMigAlmeida
Re "Preview" - Ah, got it. Yes, that still applies please continue doing that.

Signed-off-by: PauloMigAlmeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@gmail.com>

PauloMigAlmeida · 2019-09-14T23:00:17Z

@bitwiseman
I updated my tests to make use of the new wiremock structure you created.

Let me know if you need anything to be amended before you can merge it into master.

PauloMigAlmeida · 2019-09-24T07:36:03Z

ping @bitwiseman

� Conflicts: � src/main/java/org/kohsuke/github/GitHubBuilder.java � src/test/java/org/kohsuke/github/GitHubTest.java

Remove servlet exclusion due to previous JDK version; Signed-off-by: PauloMigAlmeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@gmail.com>

PauloMigAlmeida · 2019-10-03T23:02:15Z

@bitwiseman

I saw that the last few merges you did on the master branch caused this PR to conflict, so I just merged with the most up-to-date commit.

I would love to hear from you if there is anything you want me to change so that we can get this merged 😄

PauloMigAlmeida · 2019-10-03T23:18:12Z

@bitwiseman the build broke due to a legacy code which isn't connected to this PR.

bitwiseman

This looks good to me.

bitwiseman · 2019-10-04T02:20:05Z

Fixed the failures in master, so this is passing now.

sco11morgan · 2019-10-04T13:00:52Z

🎆 🎉

PauloMigAlmeida · 2019-10-04T19:16:38Z

🤩🤩🤩🤩

Implement GitHub App API methods

c905bb4

Add @Preview and @deprecated annotations to methods in which the API …

9f35eb1

…is still in preview

PauloMigAlmeida added 3 commits June 18, 2019 10:50

Add missing INTEGRATION_INSTALLATION_REPOSITORIES github event

756d298

Add missing CHECK_SUITE github event

2d15bef

Remove JWT dependencies used for testing purposes

15b3bc6

Add tests for GithubApp integration;

4703f2d

Add wiremock-standalone library; Signed-off-by: Paulo Almeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@gmail.com>

Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/kohsuke/github-api

96bcf24

# Conflicts: # pom.xml

PauloMigAlmeida and others added 2 commits August 26, 2019 12:37

Fix typo

905bd1a

Signed-off-by: Paulo Almeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@gmail.com>

Merge branch 'master' into master

a4e74ab

bitwiseman requested changes Sep 10, 2019

View reviewed changes

PauloMigAlmeida added 4 commits September 14, 2019 17:00

Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/kohsuke/github-api

dacdf08

Update tests using the new wiremock structure as per requested

3d82731

Signed-off-by: PauloMigAlmeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@gmail.com>

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master'

2253834

Remove duplicated wiremock dependency

59a9739

Signed-off-by: PauloMigAlmeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@gmail.com>

Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/kohsuke/github-api

a163c56

� Conflicts: � src/main/java/org/kohsuke/github/GitHubBuilder.java � src/test/java/org/kohsuke/github/GitHubTest.java

Merge from upstream;

0f7a5f1

Remove servlet exclusion due to previous JDK version; Signed-off-by: PauloMigAlmeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@gmail.com>

Merge branch 'master' into master

2fe7342

bitwiseman approved these changes Oct 4, 2019

View reviewed changes

bitwiseman merged commit 8da6db9 into hub4j:master Oct 4, 2019

bitwiseman mentioned this pull request Oct 11, 2019

Support all available endpoints for Github App with preview request #570

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Implement GitHub App API methods #522

Implement GitHub App API methods #522

PauloMigAlmeida commented Jun 11, 2019

ghost commented Jun 11, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Jun 11, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Jul 2, 2019

webratz commented Jul 25, 2019

bitwiseman commented Aug 7, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Aug 7, 2019 •

edited

Loading

bitwiseman commented Aug 8, 2019 •

edited

Loading

PauloMigAlmeida commented Aug 10, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Aug 14, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Aug 26, 2019

bitwiseman commented Sep 10, 2019

bitwiseman left a comment

PauloMigAlmeida commented Sep 11, 2019

bitwiseman commented Sep 12, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Sep 14, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Sep 24, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Oct 3, 2019 •

edited

Loading

PauloMigAlmeida commented Oct 3, 2019

bitwiseman left a comment

bitwiseman commented Oct 4, 2019

sco11morgan commented Oct 4, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Oct 4, 2019

Implement GitHub App API methods #522

Implement GitHub App API methods #522

Conversation

PauloMigAlmeida commented Jun 11, 2019

ghost commented Jun 11, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Jun 11, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Jul 2, 2019

webratz commented Jul 25, 2019

bitwiseman commented Aug 7, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Aug 7, 2019 • edited Loading

bitwiseman commented Aug 8, 2019 • edited Loading

PauloMigAlmeida commented Aug 10, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Aug 14, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Aug 26, 2019

bitwiseman commented Sep 10, 2019

bitwiseman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

PauloMigAlmeida commented Sep 11, 2019

bitwiseman commented Sep 12, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Sep 14, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Sep 24, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Oct 3, 2019 • edited Loading

PauloMigAlmeida commented Oct 3, 2019

bitwiseman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bitwiseman commented Oct 4, 2019

sco11morgan commented Oct 4, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Oct 4, 2019

PauloMigAlmeida commented Aug 7, 2019 •

edited

Loading

bitwiseman commented Aug 8, 2019 •

edited

Loading

PauloMigAlmeida commented Oct 3, 2019 •

edited

Loading