[GitHub] nifi-registry pull request #99: [NIFIREG-126] adding some polish and testing...

[asfgit]

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/nifi-registry/pull/99


---

[GitHub] nifi-registry pull request #99: [NIFIREG-126] adding some polish and testing...

[moranr]

Github user moranr commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/nifi-registry/pull/99#discussion_r167249634
  
--- Diff: 
nifi-registry-web-api/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/registry/web/api/AccessPolicyResource.java
 ---
@@ -174,7 +174,7 @@ public Response getAccessPolicy(
 
 final AccessPolicy accessPolicy = 
authorizationService.getAccessPolicy(identifier);
 if (accessPolicy == null) {
-throw new ResourceNotFoundException("No access policy found 
with ID + " + identifier);
+throw new ResourceNotFoundException("The specified access 
policy does not exist for this bucket.");
--- End diff --

I think that works, we could even add _"...in this registry."_ to end of 
that. It's consistent with the other messages.


---

[GitHub] nifi-registry pull request #99: [NIFIREG-126] adding some polish and testing...

[kevdoran]

Github user kevdoran commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/nifi-registry/pull/99#discussion_r167076913
  
--- Diff: 
nifi-registry-web-api/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/registry/web/api/AccessPolicyResource.java
 ---
@@ -174,7 +174,7 @@ public Response getAccessPolicy(
 
 final AccessPolicy accessPolicy = 
authorizationService.getAccessPolicy(identifier);
 if (accessPolicy == null) {
-throw new ResourceNotFoundException("No access policy found 
with ID + " + identifier);
+throw new ResourceNotFoundException("The specified access 
policy does not exist for this bucket.");
--- End diff --

I'm on board with the spirit of this change: removing cryptic UUIDs from 
the UX error messages, while still providing enough context to be 
useful/meaningful to the user. In general these changes look fine.

In this particular case, however, I think the wording of this message 
assumes too much regarding "... does not exist _for this bucket_". Access 
policies on the backend are generic to all types of resources, not just 
buckets. So for instance, one could be attempting to add a user to the access 
policy for the Proxy Resource, or the Tenants (users and groups) Resource. In 
such a case, it would be confusing to receive an error message referencing 
buckets.

I think we need use a more generic error message that is suitable for all 
cases (REST API or UI).


---

[GitHub] nifi-registry pull request #99: [NIFIREG-126] adding some polish and testing...

[scottyaslan]

GitHub user scottyaslan opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/nifi-registry/pull/99

[NIFIREG-126] adding some polish and testing around deep links

To test this PR:

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/scottyaslan/nifi-registry NIFIREG-126

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/nifi-registry/pull/99.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #99


commit bbf9d96abc96023bcc2cf0deeb8c31a1c435e850
Author: Scott Aslan 
Date:   2018-02-01T21:38:28Z

[NIFIREG-126] adding some polish and testing around deep links




---