Add All RPC Endpoints #80
Conversation
api/CampusService.pb.go
Outdated
| sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache | ||
| unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields | ||
|
|
||
| Id string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=id,proto3" json:"id,omitempty"` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since I have no idea, how the building ids look like (I dont have access to the database):
- What is the number of Buildings in this relationship?
- Could you send them to me and would adding another field for the new (NavigaTUM) ID be possible (assuming that our IDs are not 1:1 compatible?
The reason for this comment is that we identified this as a blocking issue in TUM-Dev/Campus-Android#1462
Since the RoomId, RoomCode, BuildingNr and ArchId is already present, this should not be a huge issue, but I would need some more information about what field does mean what..
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can only give an overview over that type: The building_nr has the type varchar with length 8, but I don't know how the ids look like in the database. The database scheme itself is published in the db-models-branch in this Repo.
I can add this new field in this implementation, how would it look like? Is it a string or an Integer?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Example values which I would expect (from similar-ish naming):
ArchId: "27543"
RoomCode: "5407.01.760D"
BuildingNr: "5407"
RoomId: internal Id; just used in this API
Is this assumption right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
From my point of view, at least the datatypes would match this assumption. @joschahenningsen ca you provide any example data?
Co-authored-by: Joscha Henningsen <[email protected]>
|
Can you have a look at why the staticcheck is failing? Did you regenerate the .proto changes? |
|
I didn't rerun generate after merging, now they are passing again. |
This PR adds the endpoints in the proto file for all the endpoints presented in (for the "barrier free" requests) the issue "Implementing Existing Endpoints". Which attributes are returned in which request has been taken over from the backend. The corresponding data types were taken from the models in this campus backend. The http suffix is also taken from the old campus backend.
I decided to add the base for all endpoints to reduce the number of PRs which only purpose is to alter the proto file.
The Implementation itself will be done in smaller PRs which are much easier to review.
It would be great if someone with experience with the old backend can check whether I have included the correct attributes and the correct web request addresses. Primarily, I am not 100% sure with the structure of the endpoint "getAreaFacilitiesByBuildingNr".