-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
Add a stable consent hash #1137
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
Badlapje
wants to merge
12
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
feature/stabilize-consent-hash
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
12 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
ede32a1
Add a consentHashService
e4a0b2f
Move DB logic to ConsentHashRepository
b0a67c2
Move consent queries to existing repository
MKodde 499ac7e
Extract ConsentHashServiceInterface
MKodde 6a5bcd3
Integrate upstream consent changes
MKodde 109e068
Add comment to getUnstableAttributesHash
MKodde 745243c
Add the `attribute_stable` column to `consent`
MKodde d796dfd
Add ConsentVersion value object
MKodde 3197e18
Integrate stable attribute hash requirements
MKodde 2be3625
Support NameId objects in consent hash generator
MKodde 54433bf
Optimize the consent was given methods
MKodde 145ebd9
Retrieve old/new style attribute hash in one go
MKodde File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ | ||
| <?php declare(strict_types=1); | ||
|
|
||
| namespace OpenConext\EngineBlock\Doctrine\Migrations; | ||
|
|
||
| use Doctrine\DBAL\Schema\Schema; | ||
| use Doctrine\Migrations\AbstractMigration; | ||
|
|
||
| /** | ||
| * Change to the consent schema | ||
| * 1. Added the `attribute_stable` column, string(80), not null | ||
| * 2. Changed the `attribute` column, has been made nullable | ||
| */ | ||
| final class Version20220503092351 extends AbstractMigration | ||
| { | ||
| public function up(Schema $schema) : void | ||
| { | ||
| // this up() migration is auto-generated, please modify it to your needs | ||
| $this->abortIf($this->connection->getDatabasePlatform()->getName() !== 'mysql', 'Migration can only be executed safely on \'mysql\'.'); | ||
|
|
||
| $this->addSql('ALTER TABLE consent ADD attribute_stable VARCHAR(80) NOT NULL, CHANGE attribute attribute VARCHAR(80) DEFAULT NULL'); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public function down(Schema $schema) : void | ||
| { | ||
| // this down() migration is auto-generated, please modify it to your needs | ||
| $this->abortIf($this->connection->getDatabasePlatform()->getName() !== 'mysql', 'Migration can only be executed safely on \'mysql\'.'); | ||
|
|
||
| $this->addSql('ALTER TABLE consent DROP attribute_stable, CHANGE attribute attribute VARCHAR(80) CHARACTER SET utf8 NOT NULL COLLATE `utf8_unicode_ci`'); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not yet decided on the pros and cons of adding a new hash field next to the old field.
I believe the problem is solvable with just one database field. Not sure yet if that is preferable though.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm open for other suggestions! Having it in one single column will work too in my opinion. The 'OR' based query solution would work just as well on a single column. But would make it harder to decide when we can stop supporting the old style attribute hash method.