chore: sort SDK backend api, upgrade dependencies and fix inbound misnomer

[kleyow]

No description provided.

[axolo-co]

kleyow commented:
o - o)

[mdebarros]

0_0

[mdebarros]

😄

[mdebarros]

related to this PR

[mdebarros]

@kleyow #149 <-- check my comment

[mdebarros]

you have renamed the API but not the file

[axolo-co]

kleyow commented:
I know. Github UI didn't intelligently pick up the file rename so there was no file diff and it would be impossible to review that.

I'll do the file/folder rename in my sorting PR since that is a non functional change PR.

@mdebarros

[mdebarros]

can you not create a snapshot release to check that?

[axolo-co]

kleyow commented:
Then we can take a look at what exactly was desynced in the PR's I raised ~10 hours ago.

[axolo-co]

kleyow commented:
Explain? I think I get what you're saying.

Though, since the backend openapi is in the TTKs for solely in the functional tests for bulk. Creating a snapshot of api-snippets won't really help.
Mmm...basically the sdk has no tests that would run tests through the backend openapi so any desyncing problems would likely go unnoticed until someone implemented a core connector referencing the desynced backend api.

I also need to ask @vijayg10 how we can load spec files from api-snippets so we can use that as our source of truth.

[mdebarros]

+1

[axolo-co]

vijayg10 commented:
@kleyow There is no built-in functionality to pull the remote spec, we should manage that using some init scripts before starting the service in container.

incorrectly approved

[axolo-co]

vijayg10 commented:
Guys, the naming is a bit confusing. I think we should call "DFSP backend API" and "SDK backend API" in the conversations.

[mdebarros]

manually updated to the api definitions for the TTK Backend

[mdebarros]

Mmm...basically the sdk has no tests that would run tests through the backend openapi so any desyncing problems would likely go unnoticed until someone implemented a core connector referencing the desynced backend api.
☝️ I guess you are right….

Since the functional tests are running against the updated backend api definition

[mdebarros]

ok approved the wrong PR

[axolo-co]

kleyow commented:
It's pure confusion...
I'll be naming it the SDK Backend API here and throughout.

[axolo-co]

kleyow commented:
The bulk functional tests are actually running against a old backend openapi, just that the newly added bulk paths/components/etc don't break anything outside of that bulk scope 😅

[mdebarros]

Approved PR #149

[mdebarros]

• 1

[axolo-co]

kleyow commented:
Uhhh...sorry for the PR confusion. I wanted the "sort" PR's merged in first. That was the first step I did in the "syncing". The sort PR's will help eliminate diff so we can actually see the desyncing.

[mdebarros]

oh right