AGPL Entitlements API #3523
AGPL Entitlements API #3523
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Spike Curtis <spike@coder.com>
Signed-off-by: Spike Curtis <spike@coder.com>
| EntitlementEntitled Entitlement = "entitled" | ||
| EntitlementGracePeriod Entitlement = "grace_period" | ||
| EntitlementNotEntitled Entitlement = "not_entitled" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Instead of EntitlementEntitled would Entitled suffice? Seems like these are implicit Entitlement based on the name.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like the consistency of either always or never including the prefix. It'd be nice if Go would support enums natively one day.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I copied
type UserStatus string
const (
UserStatusActive UserStatus = "active"
UserStatusSuspended UserStatus = "suspended"
)
for the sake of consistency. But, if I were writing the package myself for the first time I'd have dropped the prefix. I don't really mind either way.
coderd/features_internal_test.go
Outdated
| func TestEntitlements(t *testing.T) { | ||
| t.Parallel() | ||
| t.Run("GET", func(t *testing.T) { | ||
| t.Parallel() | ||
| r := httptest.NewRequest("GET", "https://example.com/api/v2/entitlements", nil) | ||
| rw := httptest.NewRecorder() | ||
| entitlements(rw, r) | ||
| resp := rw.Result() | ||
| assert.Equal(t, http.StatusOK, resp.StatusCode) | ||
| dec := json.NewDecoder(resp.Body) | ||
| var result codersdk.Entitlements | ||
| err := dec.Decode(&result) | ||
| require.NoError(t, err) | ||
| assert.False(t, result.HasLicense) | ||
| assert.Empty(t, result.Warnings) | ||
| for _, f := range codersdk.AllFeatures { | ||
| require.Contains(t, result.Features, f) | ||
| fe := result.Features[f] | ||
| assert.False(t, fe.Enabled) | ||
| assert.Equal(t, codersdk.EntitlementNotEntitled, fe.Entitlement) | ||
| } | ||
| }) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Doing this works around any middlewares we have that could make this not function.
Could we do this like a normal coderd test instead? Then we'd build codersdk functions to fetch entitlements, which seems valuable for future API consumers.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I could. That makes the test more complex to write and slower to execute. This unit test is just testing the handler itself returns what we expect.
There is another test case in coderd_test.go that hits the endpoint through all the API routing and middlewares, so that's covered too.
I agree a codersdk function is important, but that's in my next PR that will include a CLI command to display these entitlements.
coderd/features_internal_test.go
Outdated
| func TestEntitlements(t *testing.T) { | ||
| t.Parallel() | ||
| t.Run("GET", func(t *testing.T) { | ||
| t.Parallel() | ||
| r := httptest.NewRequest("GET", "https://example.com/api/v2/entitlements", nil) | ||
| rw := httptest.NewRecorder() | ||
| entitlements(rw, r) | ||
| resp := rw.Result() | ||
| assert.Equal(t, http.StatusOK, resp.StatusCode) | ||
| dec := json.NewDecoder(resp.Body) | ||
| var result codersdk.Entitlements | ||
| err := dec.Decode(&result) | ||
| require.NoError(t, err) | ||
| assert.False(t, result.HasLicense) | ||
| assert.Empty(t, result.Warnings) | ||
| for _, f := range codersdk.AllFeatures { | ||
| require.Contains(t, result.Features, f) | ||
| fe := result.Features[f] | ||
| assert.False(t, fe.Enabled) | ||
| assert.Equal(t, codersdk.EntitlementNotEntitled, fe.Entitlement) | ||
| } | ||
| }) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Doing this works around any middlewares we have that could make this not function.
Could we do this like a normal coderd test instead? Then we'd build codersdk functions to fetch entitlements, which seems valuable for future API consumers.
Signed-off-by: Spike Curtis <spike@coder.com>
Relates to #3278
I intend to follow up this PR with a CLI command to view the information in the Entitlements API.
RFC description of this API