JCL-402: RDF4J body handlers http error handling #1162
Merged
Conversation
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
NSeydoux
force-pushed
the
JCL-402/rdf4j-body-handlers
branch
2 times, most recently
from
bd71db4 to
1ef8bee
Compare
langsamu
reviewed
Apr 15, 2024
Contributor
langsamu
left a comment
langsamu
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same comment as for the Jena proposal.
NSeydoux
force-pushed
the
JCL-457/jena-body-handler
branch
from
4b37262 to
39299b6
Compare
NSeydoux
force-pushed
the
JCL-402/rdf4j-body-handlers
branch
from
1ef8bee to
c82183a
Compare
langsamu
reviewed
Apr 17, 2024
rdf4j/src/main/java/com/inrupt/client/rdf4j/RDF4JBodyHandlers.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
NSeydoux
force-pushed
the
JCL-457/jena-body-handler
branch
from
39299b6 to
f92ed37
Compare
NSeydoux
force-pushed
the
JCL-402/rdf4j-body-handlers
branch
from
9501c47 to
452ce77
Compare
NSeydoux
force-pushed
the
JCL-457/jena-body-handler
branch
2 times, most recently
from
ffef3bc to
b8e402f
Compare
NSeydoux
force-pushed
the
JCL-402/rdf4j-body-handlers
branch
from
4fbd520 to
f534a65
Compare
NSeydoux
force-pushed
the
JCL-457/jena-body-handler
branch
from
b8e402f to
63be5e6
Compare
NSeydoux
force-pushed
the
JCL-402/rdf4j-body-handlers
branch
from
f534a65 to
c795127
Compare
NSeydoux
force-pushed
the
JCL-402/rdf4j-body-handlers
branch
from
bf051a1 to
d0a0003
Compare
NSeydoux
commented
Apr 25, 2024
rdf4j/src/main/java/com/inrupt/client/rdf4j/RDF4JBodyHandlers.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
jholleran
reviewed
Apr 25, 2024
jholleran
reviewed
Apr 26, 2024
| private static void throwOnError(final Response.ResponseInfo responseInfo) { | ||
| if (!Response.isSuccess(responseInfo.statusCode())) { | ||
| throw new ClientHttpException( | ||
| "Could not map to an RDF4J entity.", |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The real issue is that the request failed rather been an issue mapping it to a RDF4J entity. Is this message a bit misleading?
jholleran
approved these changes
Apr 26, 2024
acoburn
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 15, 2024
* Revert "JCL-402: RDF4J body handlers http error handling (#1162)" This reverts commit e03eb1e. * Revert "JCL-402: JSONB test coverage (#1184)" This reverts commit 52d485b. * Revert "JCL-402: HTTP error handling in JenaBodyHandlers (#1159)" This reverts commit 89534b4. * Move ProblemDetails to solid module, remove ClientHttpException * ProblemDetails to interface in API module
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
This is based on #1159 , which should be reviewed first. (The only dependency between the two is in the mocks)
This deprecates the current methods in
RDF4JBodyHandlers, and replaces them with similar method throwing an appropriate exception with error details on HTTP error instead of returning an empty dataset. This makes use of the composable throwing body handler now exposed by theResponseinterface of theapimodule. The new method now haveRDF4Jin their name for this not to be a breaking change:ofModelbecomesofRDF4JModel, etc.