Identity Map V3 #83
Identity Map V3 #83
Conversation
src/test/java/com/uid2/client/IdentityMapV3IntegrationTests.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| IdentityMapV3Response.MappedIdentity mappedIdentity = identityMapResponse.getMappedIdentities().get(dii); | ||
| assertNotNull(mappedIdentity); | ||
| assertFalse(mappedIdentity.getCurrentUid().isEmpty()); | ||
| assertTrue(mappedIdentity.getRefreshFromSeconds() > Instant.now().minusSeconds(24 * 60 * 60).getEpochSecond()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
curious, why do we return seconds rather than a timestamp?
or rather, why is it getRefreshFromSeconds rather than getRefreshFromTimestampUtc or similar?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You mean make it an ISO string? We've had an unfortunate IM recently where clients tried to parse ISO strings with string parsing.
I've changed it to Instant, that would be the most idiomatic and least ambiguous.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm curious, why did you think I meant a string?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We're already returning an epoch timestamp so you don't mean that, then it sounds like an ISO timestamp. Did you mean Instant? In any case, already changed it to that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, returning Instant is better
| return currentUid; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public String getPreviousUid() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we add tests for this as well?
getPreviousRawUid ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Rename - sure.
Re test - it's hard to assert anything about it. Those are integration tests, so they run against real operators and data. We can't even assert whether there is a previous UID or it is null, because previous UID disappears 90 days after rotation.
On the other hand, if this would be a unit test, we would be just testing a getter.
I will try to cover this in E2E tests where we can check that at least some responses have previousRawUid.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, why are previous UIDs no longer available after 90 days?
|
|
||
| Response response = new Response(identityMapInput); | ||
|
|
||
| response.assertUnmapped("INVALID", "this is not a hashed email"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
curious, why have the errors changed to CAPS and a single word?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's the code we return from the APIs. I don't know why we've changed the codes from the previous version. Perhaps @gmsdelmundo has some context one he's back next week. I didn't realize it was not always like that.
I guess this makes it look more like an error code and less like an end-user message.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So this means error handling is no longer a drop-in replacement? Especially concerned about optout - if we change this to caps we will break someone.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point, but a discussion on the API side, not in SDK - here we just return whatever APIs return.
We'll consider changing this in API.
No description provided.