Ma77Ball opened a new pull request, #5979:
URL: https://github.com/apache/texera/pull/5979
### What changes were proposed in this PR?
- Added a single shared `HealthCheckResource` in the `common/auth` module
under the existing package `org.apache.texera.service.resource`, which all six
backend services already depend on.
- Deleted the six byte-for-byte identical copies from access-control,
config, file, computing-unit-managing, workflow-compiling, and
notebook-migration services (~160 lines removed).
- Kept the same fully-qualified class name, so every existing import,
`register(classOf[HealthCheckResource])` call, and test spec works unchanged
with zero call-site edits.
- amber's `org.apache.texera.web.resource.HealthCheckResource` is
intentionally left out of scope: it uses the older `javax.ws.rs` namespace and
lacks `@PermitAll`, so it is not safely mergeable.
### Any related issues, documentation, discussions?
Closes: #5976
### How was this PR tested?
- Pure consolidation with no behavior change, so no new test was added; the
existing service `*RunSpec` suites already assert
`classOf[HealthCheckResource]` registration and continue to pass against the
shared class.
- Compiled all affected modules: `sbt "Auth/compile" "ConfigService/compile"
"AccessControlService/compile" "FileService/compile"
"ComputingUnitManagingService/compile" "WorkflowCompilingService/compile"
"NotebookMigrationService/compile"`, expect all to succeed (they did locally).
- Optional manual check: start any service and `curl
localhost:<port>/api/healthcheck`, expect `{"status":"ok"}`.
### Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
Co-authored with Claude Opus 4.8 in compliance with ASF
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
