Relationship with Authority - tests...

[OmarHawk]

whether there's a problem to have a ManyToMany relationship with Authority (similar as User) using the new with builtInEntity

#22106

Please make sure the below checklist is followed for Pull Requests.

• All continuous integration tests are green
• Tests are added where necessary
• The JDL part is updated if necessary
• jhipster-online is updated if necessary
• Documentation is added/updated where necessary
• Coding Rules & Commit Guidelines as per our CONTRIBUTING.md document are followed

When you are still working on the PR, consider converting it to Draft (below reviewers) and adding skip-ci label, you can still see CI build result at your branch.

[mshima]

Failure is related to snapshots only.

[OmarHawk]

Failure is related to snapshots only.

Mh... true, one of the Snapshots was incorrectly set up. Still it won't work unfortunately. I'd try to look into it next week unless you are faster with that and want to do that by yourself ;)

[DanielFran]

@OmarHawk Can you please confirm if everything has been fixed?

[OmarHawk]

I'll rebase on Thursday and let the tests (which is the only thing until now in this pull request) run again.

[mshima]

It's needed to add this for Authority:

generator-jhipster/generators/bootstrap-application-base/utils.mjs

Line 31 in cc79505

export function createUserEntity(customUserData = {}, application) {

[OmarHawk]

It's needed to add this for Authority:

generator-jhipster/generators/bootstrap-application-base/utils.mjs

Line 31 in cc79505

export function createUserEntity(customUserData = {}, application) {

This is then really only about having it declared and then putting it like that?

generator-jhipster/generators/bootstrap-application-base/generator.mts

Lines 200 to 212 in cc79505

	loadUser({ application, entitiesToLoad }) {
	if (application.generateBuiltInUserEntity) {
	if (this.sharedData.hasEntity('User')) {
	throw new Error("Fail to bootstrap 'User', already exists.");
	}
	const customUser = entitiesToLoad.find(entityToLoad => entityToLoad.entityName === 'User');
	const customUserData = customUser ? customUser.entityStorage.getAll() : {};
	const user = createUserEntity.call(this, customUserData, application);
	this.sharedData.setEntity('User', user);
	(application as any).user = user;
	}
	},

The rest of the User entity stuff is also happening somewhere else... I wonder, why the User entity was not "simply" ;-) declared as "actual" jdl String and merged with the user defined jdl (if existing), so that it would be treated just like any other entity and could then be used as such without special logic or requirement to use "with builtInEntity" - and without having special / kind of duplicated logic/templates in a few places...

[mshima]

This is then really only about having it declared and then putting it like that?

Yes, should be.
May need specific customizations to add management.

The rest of the User entity stuff is also happening somewhere else... I wonder, why the User entity was not "simply" ;-) declared as "actual" jdl String and merged with the user defined jdl (if existing), so that it would be treated just like any other entity and could then be used as such without special logic or requirement to use "with builtInEntity" - and without having special / kind of duplicated logic/templates in a few places...

JDL does very few checks now. Consistency checks is one of them. You cannot have a relationship without both sides Entities.
with builtInEntity ignores that check.
v8 focused a lot in modularization and blueprints.
At v7 validation was determined by application configs.
This causes problems like for e.g with oauth2 auth, builtIn User exists in JHipster. None of backend blueprints implements it.

Declaring User entity instead of with builtInEntity should work and is merged to built-in definition.

entity User {}
entity Foo {}
relationship ManyToOne {
  Foo to User
}

User template is separate. So any additional field or ownerSide relationship are silently ignored. Generating User using common templates and making it customizable is doable.

About all existing logic, we have a lot of legacy code that are slowly been cleaned up.