[payout] Code generation: update services and models

[AdyenAutomationBot]

This PR contains the automated changes for the payout service.

The commit history of this PR reflects the adyen-openapi commits that have been applied.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @AdyenAutomationBot, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request delivers an automated update to the payout service models. The primary goal is to synchronize the API client with the latest OpenAPI specification, specifically by refining the FraudResultTypeEnum values and standardizing the documentation for fraud-related enums within the ResponseAdditionalDataCommon model.

Highlights

• Enum Value Update: Updated the FraudResultTypeEnum in ResponseAdditionalDataCommon.java to include AMBER and RED values, replacing the FRAUD value.
• Javadoc Refinement: Refined Javadoc comments for both FraudResultTypeEnum and FraudRiskLevelEnum to consistently list "Possible values" for improved clarity and accuracy.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Changelog

• src/main/java/com/adyen/model/payout/ResponseAdditionalDataCommon.java
  • Modified the FraudResultTypeEnum to replace the FRAUD value with AMBER and RED.
  • Updated Javadoc comments for FraudResultTypeEnum to reflect the new possible values.
  • Standardized Javadoc comments for FraudRiskLevelEnum to use "Possible values" for consistency.

Activity

• This pull request was automatically generated by AdyenAutomationBot to update services and models based on adyen-openapi commits.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This PR updates the payout service models, seemingly from a code generator. The main change is in FraudResultTypeEnum, where FRAUD is replaced by RED and AMBER is added. While this seems like a valid API update, replacing an enum constant is a breaking change. I've added a comment with a suggestion to maintain backward compatibility by deprecating the old constant instead of removing it. The other changes are Javadoc updates reflecting the enum changes, which look fine.

[gemini-code-assist]

Replacing FRAUD with RED is a breaking change. This will cause compilation errors for clients using FraudResultTypeEnum.FRAUD and can lead to runtime errors if the API still sends "FRAUD" as a value (which would result in null from fromValue).

To maintain backward compatibility, consider re-adding FRAUD as a deprecated constant. This allows existing client code to compile and run, while encouraging migration to RED. You may also want to update the Javadoc for the enum to mention the deprecation.

Suggested change

	public enum FraudResultTypeEnum {
	AMBER(String.valueOf("AMBER")),
	GREEN(String.valueOf("GREEN")),
	FRAUD(String.valueOf("FRAUD"));
	RED(String.valueOf("RED"));
	public enum FraudResultTypeEnum {
	AMBER(String.valueOf("AMBER")),
	GREEN(String.valueOf("GREEN")),
	RED(String.valueOf("RED")),
	/** @deprecated Replaced by {@link #RED}. */
	@Deprecated
	FRAUD(String.valueOf("FRAUD"));