feat(sms): make FromNumber optional — support Twilio Messaging-Service-only configs (UI-Med-2)
Code-review finding UI-Med-2: the design doc + delivery adapter treat FromNumber and MessagingServiceSid as either-or, but the entity ctor, EF schema, UI and CLI all hard- required FromNumber — so a Messaging-Service-only Twilio config (a normal production setup) could not be created. Bring the implementation into line with the spec: - Commons: SmsConfiguration.FromNumber -> string? (ctor fromNumber optional); UpdateSmsConfigCommand.FromNumber -> string?. - ConfigurationDatabase: FromNumber.IsRequired(false) + migration SmsFromNumberOptional (ALTER COLUMN nullable, idempotent; Down backfills '' — harmless, MsgSid keeps it deliverable) + regenerated model snapshot. - Transport: SmsConfigDto.FromNumber -> string? (round-trips a Messaging-Service-only config). - CentralUI: form validation requires AccountSid + at-least-one-of(FromNumber, MsgSid); nullable create/edit paths; From-number help text. - CLI: --from-number no longer Required; BuildUpdateSmsConfigCommand validates the either-or. - Adapter: From branch null-forgiving (guarded by the existing incomplete-config check). Tests: ManagementActor MsgSid-only persists null FromNumber; CLI MsgSid-only builds + neither-throws + contract (--from-number not Required); CentralUI MsgSid-only save.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -86,16 +86,19 @@ public class UpdateCommandContractTests
|
||||
[Fact]
|
||||
public void SmsUpdate_CoreFieldsRequired()
|
||||
{
|
||||
// `notification sms update` is a whole-replace of the SMS provider config, so its
|
||||
// identity + non-secret core fields must be Required — a missing --account-sid or
|
||||
// --from-number would otherwise send null and wipe a stored value. --auth-token
|
||||
// stays optional (preserve-if-omitted; empty == omitted, never "clear").
|
||||
// --id and --account-sid are unconditionally Required. --from-number is NOT Required:
|
||||
// it is either-or with --messaging-service-sid (Twilio Messaging-Service-only configs),
|
||||
// so the builder validates "at least one sender identity" instead of the option layer.
|
||||
// --auth-token stays optional (preserve-if-omitted; empty == omitted, never "clear").
|
||||
var update = UpdateCommand(NotificationCommands.Build(Url, Format, Username, Password), "sms", "update");
|
||||
AssertRequired(update, "--id", "--account-sid", "--from-number");
|
||||
AssertRequired(update, "--id", "--account-sid");
|
||||
|
||||
var authToken = update.Options.SingleOrDefault(o => o.Name == "--auth-token");
|
||||
Assert.True(authToken != null, "sms update is missing option '--auth-token'.");
|
||||
Assert.False(authToken!.Required, "sms update '--auth-token' must be optional (preserve-if-omitted).");
|
||||
foreach (var name in new[] { "--from-number", "--auth-token" })
|
||||
{
|
||||
var option = update.Options.SingleOrDefault(o => o.Name == name);
|
||||
Assert.True(option != null, $"sms update is missing option '{name}'.");
|
||||
Assert.False(option!.Required, $"sms update '{name}' must be conditionally validated / optional, not Required.");
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
[Fact]
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user