chinmaya samantara created FINERACT-2911:
--------------------------------------------
Summary: Recording attendance for a center meeting always fails
with "Client with identifier null is not in center"
Key: FINERACT-2911
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-2911
Project: Apache Fineract
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: chinmaya samantara
Assignee: chinmaya samantara
Since the meeting commands moved to the new command processing (FINERACT-2548),
POST /centers/\{centerId}/meetings rejects every attendance entry, even for
clients who are in the center. Missing or incomplete clientsAttendance also
gives a 500 instead of a validation error.
*Steps to reproduce* (center 5 has group 6, client 7 is an active member of
group 6, the center has a weekly Tuesday calendar 6 starting 01 September 2026):
{code:json}
POST /fineract-provider/api/v1/centers/5/meetings
{
"calendarId": 6, "meetingDate": "06 October 2026",
"dateFormat": "dd MMMM yyyy", "locale": "en",
"clientsAttendance": [ { "clientId": 7, "attendanceType": { "id": 1 } } ]
}
{code}
*Actual result:* HTTP 403, "Client with identifier null is not in center 5"
(error.msg.client.not.in.center).
*Expected result:* the meeting and the attendance are saved.
*Cause* (MeetingWriteServiceImpl.getClientsAttendance,
fineract-provider/.../portfolio/meeting/service/MeetingWriteServiceImpl.java):
{code:java}
.filter(group -> group.isChildClient(attendance.getId())).count();
{code}
{{attendance.getId()}} is the id of the attendance record, which is always null
when creating a meeting. It should be {{attendance.getClientId()}}. The code
before FINERACT-2548 (MeetingWritePlatformServiceJpaRepositoryImpl) used the
client id: {{group.isChildClient(clientId)}}. The group branch and the center
error message use {{attendance.getId()}} too, so the group error says "Client
with identifier null is not in group" as well.
*Related problems in the same method:*
# No clientsAttendance in the request:
{code:json}
POST /fineract-provider/api/v1/groups/2/meetings
{ "calendarId": 2, "meetingDate": "05 October 2026", "dateFormat": "dd MMMM
yyyy", "locale": "en" }
{code}
Actual: HTTP 500 ({{for (var attendance : attendances)}} with attendances ==
null). The field is not @NotNull, so either it is optional and null should mean
no attendance, or it should be rejected with a 400.
# An attendance entry without clientId gives HTTP 500. MeetingAttendanceData
has @NotNull on clientId and attendanceType, but the list in
MeetingCreateRequest is not annotated @Valid, so those constraints are never
checked. Request body part:
{code:json}
"clientsAttendance": [ { "attendanceType": { "id": 1 } } ]
{code}
For comparison, a valid group meeting on group 2 returns 200, so the group path
works when the data is complete:
{code:json}
"clientsAttendance": [ { "clientId": 5, "attendanceType": { "id": 1 } } ]
{code}
*Question:* before the new command processing, attendanceType was a number. It
now has to be an object with an id; a number gives 400 "The referenced JSON
data is invalid". The Mifos web app still sends a number. Was this change
intended? If yes, the web app needs an update; if not, the API could accept
both.
{code:json}
"attendanceType": 1 (old format, now 400)
"attendanceType": { "id": 1 } (new format)
{code}
*Possible fix:* use {{attendance.getClientId()}} in the group and center
checks, treat a null clientsAttendance as an empty list (or validate it), add
@Valid to the list, and add integration tests for center attendance and the
validation cases.
Found on: Fineract develop (7ac7801, local Docker). MeetingWriteServiceImpl is
unchanged on develop 8bdbff9 (2026-10-09); its last change is 912eaf1
(FINERACT-2548).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
