[Tags] add tag management feature

[SeanHH86]

What is this feature?

[Add a brief description of what the feature or update does.]

Why do we need this feature?

[Add a description of the problem the feature is trying to solve.]

Who is this feature for?

[Add information on what kind of user the feature is for.]

Which issue(s) does this PR fix?:

Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

MR Summary:

The summary is added by @codegpt.

This Merge Request introduces a comprehensive tag management feature, including API endpoints for creating, retrieving, updating, and deleting tags based on their ID. It encompasses backend logic, API handlers, and unit tests to ensure functionality across different components of the system. The changes include modifications to database interactions for tag operations, updates to the component layer to handle business logic related to tags, and the introduction of new API routes for tag management. Additionally, the documentation has been updated to reflect these new API endpoints, and wire set configurations have been adjusted to incorporate the new tag component.

Key updates:

1. Implemented backend logic for creating, retrieving, updating, and deleting tags.
2. Added API endpoints for tag management operations.
3. Introduced unit tests for new functionalities.
4. Updated Swagger documentation to include new tag management APIs.
5. Adjusted wire set configurations to include the tag component.

[starship-github]

Possible Issues And Suggestions:

• _mocks/opencsg.com/csghub-server/component/mock_TagComponent.go

  • Comments:
    • The panic in CreateTag, DeleteTag, and GetTagByID methods might not be the best way to handle missing return values. Consider returning an error instead.
  • Suggestions:

    if len(ret) == 0 {
        return nil, errors.New("no return value specified for CreateTag")
    }
    

• Line 624 in builder/store/database/tag_test.go

  • Comments:
    • The test 'TestTagStore_DeleteTagByID' does not verify if the tag is actually removed from the repository's tags after deletion.
  • Suggestions:

    repoTags, err := ts.Tags(ctx, repo.ID)
    require.Empty(t, err)
    for _, tag := range repoTags {
        require.NotEqual(t, tag1.ID, tag.ID)
    }
    

• component/tag.go

  • Comments:
    • User permission check message is misleading, should be 'not allowed to create tag'.
  • Suggestions:

    return nil, fmt.Errorf("user %s is not allowed to create tag", username)
    

• component/tag.go

  • Comments:
    • Sensitive word check should specify the scenario more clearly than using 'nickname detection'.
  • Suggestions:

    // Assuming there's a more appropriate scenario for tag names
    result, err := c.sensitiveChecker.PassTextCheck(ctx, string(sensitive.ScenarioTagNameDetection), req.Name)
    

• component/tag_test.go

  • Comments:
    • Mock expectation 'FindByUsername' role mask value 'persion' seems to be a typo. Should be 'person'.

• _mocks/opencsg.com/csghub-server/builder/store/database/mock_TagStore.go

  • Comments:
    • The panic in the mock function 'DeleteTagByID' for no return value might be too aggressive for testing. Consider returning a default error instead.
  • Suggestions:

    if len(ret) == 0 {
        return fmt.Errorf("no return value specified for DeleteTagByID")
    }
    

• api/handler/tag.go

  • Comments:
    • The error handling in 'GetTagByID' does not differentiate between 'strconv.ParseInt' parsing errors and tag retrieval errors, potentially misleading.
  • Suggestions:

    if err != nil {
        slog.Error("Failed to parse tag ID", slog.Any("error", err))
        httpbase.BadRequest(ctx, "invalid tag ID format")
        return
    }
    

• api/handler/tag.go

  • Comments:
    • Logging sensitive information like 'userName' in 'CreateTag', 'GetTagByID', 'UpdateTag', and 'DeleteTag' methods could pose a security risk.

• Line 468 in component/wireset.go

  • Comments:
    • Adding 'userStore' to 'NewTestTagComponent' without modifying its usage or constructor parameters might indicate incomplete implementation or unused code.

• Line 408 in builder/store/database/tag.go

  • Comments:
    • The error message in 'FindTagByID', 'UpdateTagByID', and 'DeleteTagByID' should include more context or use a standardized error handling approach for consistency.

• api/handler/tag_test.go

  • Comments:
    • The test 'TestTagHandler_AllTags' directly manipulates 'ginContext' parameters which might not reflect actual API behavior accurately. Consider using a more integrated approach for setting up request context.

MR Evaluation:

This feature is still under test, evaluation are given by AI and might be inaccurate.

After evaluation, the code changes in the Merge Request get score: 98-100.

Tips

CodeReview Commands (invoked as MR or PR comments)

• @codegpt /review to trigger an code review.
• @codegpt /evaluate to trigger code evaluation process.
• @codegpt /describe to regenerate the summary of the MR.
• @codegpt /secscan to scan security vulnerabilities for the MR or the Repository.
• @codegpt /help to get help.

CodeReview Discussion Chat

There are 2 ways to chat with Starship CodeReview:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by StarShip.
  Example:
  • @codegpt How to fix this bug?
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab):
  Tag @codegpt in a new review comment at the desired location with your query.
  Examples:
  • @codegpt generate unit testing code for this code snippet.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window.
It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks.
For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the MR/PR comments.

CodeReview Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation
  for detailed information on how to use Starship CodeReview.

About Us:

Visit the OpenCSG StarShip website for the Dashboard and detailed information on CodeReview, CodeGen, and other StarShip modules.

[ganisback]

LGTM

[starship-github]

The StarShip CodeReviewer was triggered but terminated because it encountered an issue: The MR state is not opened.

Tips

CodeReview Commands (invoked as MR or PR comments)

• @codegpt /review to trigger an code review.
• @codegpt /evaluate to trigger code evaluation process.
• @codegpt /describe to regenerate the summary of the MR.
• @codegpt /secscan to scan security vulnerabilities for the MR or the Repository.
• @codegpt /help to get help.

CodeReview Discussion Chat

There are 2 ways to chat with Starship CodeReview:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by StarShip.
  Example:
  • @codegpt How to fix this bug?
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab):
  Tag @codegpt in a new review comment at the desired location with your query.
  Examples:
  • @codegpt generate unit testing code for this code snippet.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window.
It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks.
For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the MR/PR comments.

CodeReview Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation
  for detailed information on how to use Starship CodeReview.