API push from API designer will be created as V4 API #13816

aurelien-pacaud · 2025-10-24T06:47:39Z

Issue

https://gravitee.atlassian.net/browse/CJ-2571

Description

⚠️ v4 update not supported from API designer

All new API created from API designer will be created as v4 API on APIM side

Additional context

Screen.Recording.2025-10-24.at.08.44.03.mov

gemini-code-assist · 2025-10-24T06:48:03Z

Summary of Changes

Hello @aurelien-pacaud, 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 modernizes the API creation and management flow originating from the API designer. It introduces the capability to create new APIs as V4 APIs by default, while maintaining support for updating existing V2 APIs. The underlying service logic has been refactored to consolidate API deployment and state management, leading to a more streamlined and robust system for handling different API definition versions.

Highlights

V4 API Creation from API Designer: New APIs pushed from the API designer will now be created as V4 APIs by default, streamlining the API creation process with the latest API definition version.
V2 API Update Support: Existing V2 APIs can still be updated through the API designer, ensuring backward compatibility for current API implementations.
Refactored API Deployment Logic: The DeployModelCommandHandler has been significantly refactored to centralize API creation and update logic, distinguishing between V2 API updates and V4 API deployments, and consolidating previously separate V4 API handling.
Flow Definition Initialization: The Flow class in the API definition model now explicitly initializes request and response step lists as empty ArrayLists, preventing potential NullPointerException issues when no steps are defined.
Consolidation of V4 API Services: Dedicated V4 API command handlers and service implementations (V4ApiCommandHandler, V4ApiServiceCockpit, V4ApiServiceCockpitImpl) have been removed, integrating their functionality into the main DeployModelCommandHandler and ApiServiceCockpitImpl for a more unified approach.

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.

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 pull request refactors the API deployment from the API designer to create v4 APIs by default, which aligns with the stated goal. The changes simplify the command handling by consolidating logic into DeployModelCommandHandler and removing now-redundant handlers. The separation of v2 API updates from v4 API creation is clear and improves code structure. The new logic is also well-supported by new and updated tests. My review includes a few suggestions to enhance exception handling and improve maintainability by replacing hardcoded strings with constants.

gemini-code-assist · 2025-10-24T06:50:05Z

...ain/java/io/gravitee/rest/api/service/cockpit/command/handler/DeployModelCommandHandler.java

+        final var executionContext = new ExecutionContext(getEnvironment(environmentId));
+        final var user = userService.findBySource(executionContext.getOrganizationId(), "cockpit", userId, true);
+        final var optApiId = apiSearchService.findIdByEnvironmentIdAndCrossId(executionContext.getEnvironmentId(), apiCrossId);

        try {


The try block starts after several calls that could throw runtime exceptions, such as getEnvironment() (line 81) and userService.findBySource() (line 82). If an exception like EnvironmentNotFoundException or UserNotFoundException is thrown, it won't be caught by the catch (Exception e) block at line 133. This would result in an unhandled exception instead of a graceful DeployModelReply with an error status. To ensure all potential exceptions during setup are handled correctly, the try block should be moved to before these calls (e.g., before line 75), ensuring the payload variable remains in scope for the catch block.

gemini-code-assist · 2025-10-24T06:50:05Z

...ain/java/io/gravitee/rest/api/service/cockpit/command/handler/DeployModelCommandHandler.java

+                        logger.warn("Update of v4 API is not yet supported.");
+                        return Single.just(new DeployModelReply(command.getId(), "Update of v4 API is not yet supported."));


The warning message is hardcoded in both the log and the reply. It's a good practice to extract such strings into a constant to improve maintainability and consistency.

For example, you could define a constant in the class:
private static final String V4_API_UPDATE_NOT_SUPPORTED_MESSAGE = "Update of v4 API is not yet supported.";

logger.warn(V4_API_UPDATE_NOT_SUPPORTED_MESSAGE); return Single.just(new DeployModelReply(command.getId(), V4_API_UPDATE_NOT_SUPPORTED_MESSAGE));

gemini-code-assist · 2025-10-24T06:50:06Z

...ain/java/io/gravitee/rest/api/service/cockpit/command/handler/DeployModelCommandHandler.java

-            String errorDetails = "Failed to import API [%s].".formatted(result.getErrorMessage());
-            logger.error(errorDetails);
+        } catch (InvalidPathsException ipe) {
+            final var errorDetails = "Failed to import API [context path not available].";


This error message is hardcoded. It's a good practice to extract such strings into constants to improve maintainability and make them easier to manage.

For example, you could define a constant in the class:
private static final String FAILED_TO_IMPORT_API_CONTEXT_PATH_NOT_AVAILABLE = "Failed to import API [context path not available].";

final var errorDetails = FAILED_TO_IMPORT_API_CONTEXT_PATH_NOT_AVAILABLE;

gemini-code-assist · 2025-10-24T06:50:06Z

...ain/java/io/gravitee/rest/api/service/cockpit/command/handler/DeployModelCommandHandler.java

            return Single.just(new DeployModelReply(command.getId(), errorDetails));
        } catch (Exception e) {
-            String errorDetails = "Error occurred when importing api [%s]".formatted(payload.modelId());
+            final var errorDetails = "Error occurred when importing api [%s]".formatted(payload.modelId());


This error message format is hardcoded. It's a good practice to extract such strings into constants to improve maintainability.

For example, you could define a constant in the class:
private static final String ERROR_OCCURRED_WHEN_IMPORTING_API = "Error occurred when importing api [%s]";

final var errorDetails = ERROR_OCCURRED_WHEN_IMPORTING_API.formatted(payload.modelId());

gemini-code-assist · 2025-10-24T06:50:06Z

...rvice/src/main/java/io/gravitee/rest/api/service/cockpit/services/ApiServiceCockpitImpl.java

+                        .mode(PlanMode.STANDARD)
+                        .status(io.gravitee.definition.model.v4.plan.PlanStatus.PUBLISHED)
+                        .definitionVersion(DefinitionVersion.V4)
+                        .security(PlanSecurity.builder().type("key-less").build())


The security type "key-less" is hardcoded. It's better to use a constant for such values to avoid typos and improve maintainability. Please consider defining a constant for this value, for example:
private static final String KEYLESS_PLAN_SECURITY_TYPE = "key-less";

Suggested change

.security(PlanSecurity.builder().type("key-less").build())

.security(PlanSecurity.builder().type(KEYLESS_PLAN_SECURITY_TYPE).build())

gemini-code-assist · 2025-10-24T06:50:06Z

...rvice/src/main/java/io/gravitee/rest/api/service/cockpit/services/ApiServiceCockpitImpl.java

+
+        // Force API deployment if out of sync
+        if (!apiStateDomainService.isSynchronized(api, audit)) {
+            apiStateDomainService.deploy(api, "Managed by Gravitee Cloud", audit);


The deployment label "Managed by Gravitee Cloud" is hardcoded. Extracting this to a constant would improve maintainability and reusability.

For example, you could define a constant for this value:
private static final String DEPLOYMENT_LABEL_COCKPIT = "Managed by Gravitee Cloud";

Suggested change

apiStateDomainService.deploy(api, "Managed by Gravitee Cloud", audit);

apiStateDomainService.deploy(api, DEPLOYMENT_LABEL_COCKPIT, audit);

ThibaudAV · 2025-10-24T08:54:58Z

.../gravitee-apim-definition-model/src/main/java/io/gravitee/definition/model/v4/flow/Flow.java

+    @Builder.Default
    @Valid
-    private List<Step> request;
+    private List<Step> request = new ArrayList<>();


Are these changes necessary? Because it seems to me that this could be nullable. For example, in the case of native, these properties are not useful 🤔

Other parts of the code assume both lists are present. To avoid NPEs or null checks, the simplest approach is to always have an empty list.

The tests seem fine; I hope this change doesn't introduce any regressions or bugs.

...ain/java/io/gravitee/rest/api/service/cockpit/command/handler/DeployModelCommandHandler.java

.../src/main/java/io/gravitee/apim/core/api/use_case/cockpit/DeployModelToApiCreateUseCase.java

v2 API push isn't supported

aurelien-pacaud requested a review from a team as a code owner October 24, 2025 06:47

gemini-code-assist bot reviewed Oct 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

ThibaudAV reviewed Oct 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

aurelien-pacaud marked this pull request as draft October 24, 2025 13:56

aurelien-pacaud force-pushed the cj-2575-push-v4-api branch 5 times, most recently from 7527927 to 5374951 Compare October 28, 2025 08:23

aurelien-pacaud marked this pull request as ready for review October 28, 2025 09:16

Okhelifi approved these changes Oct 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

aurelien-pacaud force-pushed the cj-2575-push-v4-api branch 2 times, most recently from bbbf38a to 298cc85 Compare October 29, 2025 08:19

aurelien-pacaud added 3 commits October 29, 2025 12:46

chore: remove unused V4_API command

16c8a5b

feat: adapt DEPLOY_MODEL_COMMAND to allow v4 API push

a72da1f

v2 API push isn't supported

feat: adapt DEPLOY_MODEL_COMMAND to allow v4 API update

b4e1a9a

aurelien-pacaud force-pushed the cj-2575-push-v4-api branch from 298cc85 to b4e1a9a Compare October 29, 2025 11:46

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

API push from API designer will be created as V4 API #13816

API push from API designer will be created as V4 API #13816

aurelien-pacaud commented Oct 24, 2025

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot commented Oct 24, 2025

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Oct 24, 2025

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Oct 24, 2025

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Oct 24, 2025

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Oct 24, 2025

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Oct 24, 2025

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Oct 24, 2025

Uh oh!

ThibaudAV Oct 24, 2025

Uh oh!

aurelien-pacaud Oct 28, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

		logger.warn("Update of v4 API is not yet supported.");
		return Single.just(new DeployModelReply(command.getId(), "Update of v4 API is not yet supported."));

	.security(PlanSecurity.builder().type("key-less").build())
	.security(PlanSecurity.builder().type(KEYLESS_PLAN_SECURITY_TYPE).build())

	apiStateDomainService.deploy(api, "Managed by Gravitee Cloud", audit);
	apiStateDomainService.deploy(api, DEPLOYMENT_LABEL_COCKPIT, audit);

Uh oh!

API push from API designer will be created as V4 API #13816

Are you sure you want to change the base?

API push from API designer will be created as V4 API #13816

Conversation

aurelien-pacaud commented Oct 24, 2025

Issue

Description

Additional context

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot commented Oct 24, 2025

Summary of Changes

Highlights

Footnotes

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Code Review

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Oct 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Oct 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Oct 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Oct 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Oct 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Oct 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ThibaudAV Oct 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

aurelien-pacaud Oct 28, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants