I am currently working on API in laravel 5.6 and I would like versioning for APIs like v1 and v2.
my problem is I want to run one URL and access both API version, I am passing version number into HEADER and access API controller according to the version number. I am also using middle ware to check version number but not getting what I need.
Here is my web.php
Route::post('/api/getticktes/{id}', 'Api\v1\TicketController#show')->middleware('checkHeaderV1');
Header
version :- v1
version :- v2
My controller directory is
Controller
-Api
--v1
---TicketController.php
--v2
---TicketController.php
You can use this class, i have used it in my old project, may be it is not the efficient way but it will work
ApiVersion class
namespace App\Http;
use Illuminate\Http\Request;
class ApiVersion
{
protected static $valid_api_versions = [
1 => 'v1',
2 => 'v2'
];
protected static function get($request)
{
$allApiVersions = array_keys(self::$valid_api_versions);
$latestVersion = $allApiVersions[count($allApiVersions) - 1];
$apiVersion = $request->header('api-version', $latestVersion);
return in_array($apiVersion, $allApiVersions) ? $apiVersion : $latestVersion;
}
protected static function getNamespace($apiVersion)
{
return 'Api\\' . self::$valid_api_versions[$apiVersion];
}
public static function versionNamespace()
{
$request = Request::capture();
return $apiNamespace = ApiVersion::getNamespace(self::get($request));
}
}
Now use this middleware in api routes file for namespace
//API routes
$versionNameSpace = ApiVersion::versionNamespace();
Route::group(['middleware' => ['api'], 'namespace' => "{$versionNameSpace}"], function () {
});
Add api-version in your request header. The value should be 1 or 2 etc
Related
I'm trying to get the current route rule in my filter.
$routes->group('creditCalculator', ['namespace' => '\Modules\CreditCalculator', "filter" => 'auth:recht1', 'extra_credentials' => array('as'=>'test', 'menu'=>'profile')], function($routes){
$routes->post('/', 'CreditCalculator_Controller::index');
$routes->get('test', 'CreditCalculator_Controller::test', ["filter"=>"auth:test1", 'test2' => 'test3']);
$routes->get('test2/(:num)/(:any)', 'CreditCalculator_Controller::test2/$1/$2', ["as"=>'named_route', "filter"=>"auth:recht3", 'right' => 'right1']);
In the "auth" filter I would like to get access to the current matched route to get the routeOptions.
Target:
We want to set some rules for each route. Afterwards we want to check these settings in our Filter. Example: Login-Type. So we can check each route, which login type is needed for this current route.
We are using Codeigniter 4 HMVC.
Any suggestions?
The documentation of CI4 and the api-documentation didn't get me far. I tried several methods of the router, but no method gave me the current matched route.
What I need as return: /test/(:num)/(:any) and the options array of that route
So far - our filter:
<?php
namespace App\Filters;
use CodeIgniter\HTTP\RequestInterface;
use CodeIgniter\HTTP\ResponseInterface;
use CodeIgniter\Filters\FilterInterface;
class filterTest implements FilterInterface {
public function before(RequestInterface $request, $arguments = null) {
$list = \Config\Services::routes();
$routes = $list->getRoutesOptions();
}
public function after(RequestInterface $request, ResponseInterface $response, $arguments = null) {
}
}
I just included the wrong Service. Over Service Router I can access the 'getMatchedRouteOptions' method.
$router = \Config\Services::router();
$routeOptions = $router->getMatchedRouteOptions();
I am trying to use this package to push notifications to users via OneSignal. However I needed to make a little change. My API serves two (related) apps and I have two OneSignal configs. I am trying to override its ServiceProvider (using this technique).
The ServiceProvider presents itself as follows
<?php
namespace NotificationChannels\OneSignal;
use Berkayk\OneSignal\OneSignalClient;
use Illuminate\Support\ServiceProvider;
use NotificationChannels\OneSignal\Exceptions\InvalidConfiguration;
class OneSignalServiceProvider extends ServiceProvider
{
/**
* Bootstrap the application services.
*/
public function boot()
{
$this->app->when(OneSignalChannel::class)
->needs(OneSignalClient::class)
->give(function () {
$oneSignalConfig = config('services.onesignal');
if (is_null($oneSignalConfig)) {
throw InvalidConfiguration::configurationNotSet();
}
return new OneSignalClient(
$oneSignalConfig['app_id'],
$oneSignalConfig['rest_api_key'],
''
);
});
}
}
The behavior that I want to change is located in the line
$oneSignalConfig = config('services.onesignal');
As it assumes that my config/services.php has the following entry (stated in the doc) :
// config/services.php
...
'onesignal' => [
'app_id' => env('ONESIGNAL_APP_ID'),
'rest_api_key' => env('ONESIGNAL_REST_API_KEY')
],
...
Whereas I want to set my config/services.php as follows
// config/services.php
...
'onesignal' => [
'app1' => [
'app_id' => env('ONESIGNAL_1_APP_ID'),
'rest_api_key' => env('ONESIGNAL_1_REST_API_KEY')
],
'app2' => [
'app_id' => env('ONESIGNAL_2_APP_ID'),
'rest_api_key' => env('ONESIGNAL_2_REST_API_KEY')
],
],
...
And I want somehow to tell my ServiceProvider (through some kind of parameter) to either do
$oneSignalConfig = config('services.onesignal.app1');
OR
$oneSignalConfig = config('services.onesignal.app2');
But I didn't find any way to pass a parameter to the class, the boot function or the give method (and if I understood well I shouldn't even be doing that).
The only way I could think of is to create two classes that extend the OneSignalChannel::class
and duplicate code in the boot function so it becomes as follows :
public function boot()
{
$this->app->when(FirstOneSignalChannel::class)
->needs(OneSignalClient::class)
->give(function () {
$oneSignalConfig = config('services.onesignal.app1');
if (is_null($oneSignalConfig)) {
throw InvalidConfiguration::configurationNotSet();
}
return new OneSignalClient(
$oneSignalConfig['app_id'],
$oneSignalConfig['rest_api_key'],
''
);
});
$this->app->when(SecondOneSignalChannel::class)
->needs(OneSignalClient::class)
->give(function () {
$oneSignalConfig = config('services.onesignal.app2');
if (is_null($oneSignalConfig)) {
throw InvalidConfiguration::configurationNotSet();
}
return new OneSignalClient(
$oneSignalConfig['app_id'],
$oneSignalConfig['rest_api_key'],
''
);
});
}
The difference in the when provoking a difference in the config but it seems a lot of duplication and not extensible (what if I had three apps).
Should I use this method, or is there a way to pass a parameter to this ServiceProvider or is there another solution ?
https://stackoverflow.com/a/34224082/10371024
I could see what you need, but to pass parameter to boot method is not a good idea according to Laravel architecture. You may try to get what you want with using events as Vladislav suggested.
In my Laravel 5.8 app I have many API routes which return paginated results. If I make a request to my API appending the following query string I can disable pagination.
http://api.test/users/?no_paginate=1
My question is... how can I disable no_paginate from being used on certain routes? I'd preferbly want some validation to go in the request class but I can't find anything in the docs for that.
You can do this using a Global Middleware.
Create a DisableNoPaginate Middleware:
php artisan make:middleware DisableNoPaginate
Then define what the middleware should do (DisableNoPaginate.php):
<?php
namespace App\Http\Middleware;
use Closure;
class DisableNoPaginate
{
public function handle($request, Closure $next)
{
//remove no_paginate param from request object
unset($request['no_paginate']);
return $next($request);
}
}
Arrange for the middleware to run on all routes (routes.php):
$app->middleware([
App\Http\Middleware\DisableNoPaginate::class
]);
Now the no_paginate query param should be stripped from all your incoming requests.
For the best approach to get users either paginate or get all listing by below code in UsersController
public function index($type = null, Request $request)
{
$builder = User::where(/*query*/);
if($type == "paginate") {
$items = $builder->paginate(10);
} else {
$items = $builder->get();
}
return view("users.index", ['users' => $items]);
}
Here is the route in web.php/api.php file
Route::get('/{type?}', ['as' => 'users.index', 'uses' => 'UsersController#index']);
Here url will be
http://api.test/users/paginate // get pagination response.
http://api.test/users // get response without pagination
I think this will help you.
I recently dove into the world of laravel (version 5.4). While initially confused, the concept of MVC makes a lot of sense in writing large applications. Applications that you want to be easily understood by outside developers.
Using laravel for this has greatly simplified coding in PHP and has made the language fun again. However, beyond dividing code into its respective models, views, and controllers, what happens if we need to divide controllers to prevent them from growing too large?
A solution that I have found to this is to define one controller each folder and then fill that controller with traits that further add functionalities to the controller. (All-caps = folder):
CONTROLLER
HOME
Controller.php
TRAITS
additionalFunctionality1.php
additionalFunctionality2.php
additionalFunctionality3.php
...
ADMIN
Controller.php
TRAITS
additionalFunctionality1.php
additionalFunctionality2.php
additionalFunctionality3.php
...
Within routes/web.php I woud initialize everything as so:
Route::namespace('Home')->group(function () {
Route::get('home', 'Controller.php#loadPage');
Route::post('test', 'Controller.php#fun1');
Route::post('test2', 'Controller.php#fun2');
Route::post('test3', 'Controller.php#fun3');
});
Route::namespace('Admin')->group(function () {
Route::get('Admin', 'Controller.php#loadPage');
Route::post('test', 'Controller.php#fun1');
Route::post('test2', 'Controller.php#fun2');
Route::post('test3', 'Controller.php#fun3');
});
With me being new to laravel, this seems like a simple and elegant way to organize my logic. It is however something I do not see while researching laravel controller organization.
The Question
Is there an issue, both in the short-run and in the long-run, of organizing my data like this? What is a better alternative?
Example Controller:
<?php
namespace App\Http\Controllers\Message;
use DB;
use Auth;
use Request;
use FileHelper;
use App\Http\Controllers\Message\Traits\MessageTypes;
use App\Http\Controllers\Controller;
class MessageController extends Controller
{
// Traits that are used within the message controller
use FileHelper, MessageTypes;
/**
* #var array $data Everything about the message is stored here
*/
protected $data = []; // everything about the message
/**
* #var booloean/array $sendableData Additional data that is registered through the send function
*/
protected $sendableData = false;
/**
* Create a new controller instance.
*
* #return void
*/
public function __construct()
{
$this->middleware('auth');
$this->middleware('access');
}
/**
* Enable sendableData by passing data to the variable
*
* #param array $data Addition data that needs to registrered
* #return MessageController
*/
protected function send ($data = []) {
// enable sendableData by passing data to the variable
$this->sendableData = $data;
return $this;
}
/**
* Enable sendableData by passing data to the variable
*
* #param string $type The type of message that we will serve to the view
* #return MessageController
*/
protected function serve ($type = "message") {
$this->ss();
$this->setData(array_merge($this->sendableData, $this->status[$type]));
$this->data->id = DB::table('messages')->insertGetId((array) $this->data);
}
/**
* Set the data of the message to be used to send or construct a message
* Note that this function turns "(array) $data" into "(object) $data"
*
* #param array $extend Override default settings
* #return MessageController
*/
protected function setData(array $extend = []) {
$defaults = [
"lobby" => Request::get('lobbyid'),
"type" => "text",
"subtype" => null,
"body" => null,
"time" => date("g:ia"),
"user" => Auth::User()->username,
"userid" => Auth::User()->id,
"day" => date("j"),
"month" => date("M"),
"timestamp" => time(),
"private" => Request::get('isPrivate') ? "1" : "0",
"name" => Request::get('displayname'),
"kicker" => null
];
$this->data = (object) array_merge($defaults, $extend);
// because a closure can not be saved in the database we will remove it after we need it
unset($this->data->message);
return $this;
}
/**
* Send out a response for PHP
*
* #return string
*/
public function build() {
if($this->data->type == "file") {
$filesize = #filesize("uploads/" . $this->data->lobby . "/" . $this->data->body);
$this->data->filesize = $this->human_filesize($filesize, 2);
}
// do not send unneccessary data
unset($this->data->body, $this->data->time, $this->data->kicker, $this->data->name, $this->data->timestamp);
return $this->data;
}
/**
* Send out a usable response for an AJAX request
*
* #return object
*/
public function json() {
return json_encode($this->build());
}
}
?>
Laravel architecture is simple enough for any size of the application.
Laravel provides several mechanisms for developers to tackle the fatty controllers in your Application.
Use Middlewares for authentications.
Use Requests for validations and manipulating data.
Use Policy for your aplication roles.
Use Repository for writing your database queries.
Use Transformers for your APIs to transform data.
It depends on your application. if it is too large and have different Modules or functionalities then you should use a modular approach.
A nice package is available for making independent modules here
Hope this helps.
I think you should do a little differently ! First you should use your traits at the same levels as the controllers since traits are not controllers, your tree should look more like :
Http
Controller
Controller.php
Home
YourControllers
Admin
Your admin controllers
Traits
Your Traits
Next your routes need to be more like that :
Route::group(['prefix' => 'home'], function()
{
Route::get('/', 'Home\YourController#index')->name('home.index');
}
Route::group(['prefix' => 'admin', 'middleware' => ['admin']], function()
{
Route::get('/', 'Admin\DashboardController#index')->name('dashboard.index');
}
You can use many kink or routes like :
Route::post('/action', 'yourControllers#store')->name('controller.store');
Route::patch('/action', 'yourControllers#update')->name('controller.update');
Route::resource('/action', 'yourController');
The Resource route creates automatically the most used your, like post, patch, edit, index.. You just need to write the action and the controller called with its action. You can check out your toutes with this command : php artisan route:list
Laravel also has many automated features, like the creation of a controller with this command : php artisan make:controller YourController.
For the routes the prefix creates portions of url, for example all the routes inside the route group with the prefix 'admin' will lool like : www.yourwebsite.com/admin/theroute, and can also be blocked for some users with a middleware.
To get familiar with laravel i suggest you follow the laravel 5.4 tutorial from scratch by Jeffrey Way on Laracasts, he's awesome at explaining and showing how laravel works. Here is a link : https://laracasts.com/series/laravel-from-scratch-2017
Hope it helps, ask me if you want to know anything else or have some precisions, i'll try to answer you !
I am writing a unit test in Laravel 5.0 and in my request class I am using a different bag to show the validation error messages.
I am using this in my file:
/* ExampleRequest.php */
namespace App\Http\Requests;
use App\Http\Requests\Request;
use Illuminate\Support\Facades\Auth;
class ExampleRequest extends Request {
protected $errorBag = 'otherbag';
public function rules(){
return [
'my_field' => 'required'
];
}
}
In my test file, I am testing using this:
/* ExampleTest.php */
class ExampleTest extends TestCase {
public function testPostWithoutData(){
$response = $this->call('POST', 'url/to/post',[
'my_field' => ''
]);
$this->assertSessionHasErrors('my_field');
}
}
If I run the tests, it can't get the right assert and return this problem:
Session missing error: my_field
Failed asserting that false is true.
If I take out the $errorBag attribute from the request file, I have no problems.
I can give more details as needed.
You can get an alternate bag from the session store like this:
$myBag = $this->app('session_store')->getBag('otherBag');
$this->assertTrue($myBag->any());
However, Laravel does not use an alternate bag by default, so I'm assuming you're doing something in your code to register your App\Request::$errorBag with the session handler.
I don't know if you are setting your session elsewhere but I guess you may do something like:
$this->session(['foo' => 'bar']);
Before you can assert something in session. See testing helpers section for Laravel 5.0