DPF: add TransferRequestDto id

[algattik]

What this PR changes/adds

Add id to TransferRequestDto and support it in converter to TransferRequest

Why it does that

If different data transfers are created (POST /api/v1/data/transferprocess) for the same asset, the same ID is returned back. The reason is that the DataTransfer.id field is not populated (as it is not present in DataTransferDto), and the idempotency mechanism in TransferProcessManagerImpl#initiateRequest is based on it.

Further notes

Also deleted a (unused) duplicate TransferRequestDto class

Linked Issue(s)

Closes #1182

Checklist

• added appropriate tests?
• performed checkstyle check locally?
• added/updated copyright headers?
• documented public classes/methods?
• added/updated relevant documentation?
• added relevant details to the changelog? (skip with label no-changelog)
• formatted title correctly? (take a look at the CONTRIBUTING and styleguide for details)

[algattik]

We could also allow the client optionally not to generate an ID, and have the server generate one in that case. Personally I'd rather not add code paths that are not necessary, as this creates more testing and validation work - the client can just generate a random UUID. Agree @ndr-brt @bscholtes1A @paullatzelsperger ?

As discussed, I am fine with the proposed approach. Even if I think that putting it as optional would be even better, i.e. if no id provided in the Dto, then a random id is generated internally.

[florianrusch-zf]

@ndr-brt this PR reflects what we were talking about this morning, doesn't it? nevermind, saw the other issue

[ndr-brt]

@algattik I agree on generating a random UUID in the case the DataRequestDto.id is null

[bscholtes1A]

@algattik I agree on generating a random UUID in the case the DataRequestDto.id is null

As discussed, I am also in favor of generating a random id if none is provided in the request, i.e. make id optional.

@paullatzelsperger WDYT?

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #1188 (2bcadf4) into main (d056af2) will decrease coverage by 4.18%.
The diff coverage is 86.48%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #1188      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     62.65%   58.46%   -4.19%     
+ Complexity     2981     2728     -253     
============================================
  Files           694      698       +4     
  Lines         15428    15469      +41     
  Branches       1048     1047       -1     
============================================
- Hits           9666     9044     -622     
- Misses         5331     6002     +671     
+ Partials        431      423       -8     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...tractagreement/ContractAgreementApiController.java	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...tnegotiation/ContractNegotiationApiController.java	90.32% <ø> (ø)
...ionInitiateRequestDtoToDataRequestTransformer.java	90.47% <60.00%> (-9.53%)	⬇️
...r/api/datamanagement/asset/AssetApiController.java	84.44% <66.66%> (ø)
...actdefinition/ContractDefinitionApiController.java	90.90% <66.66%> (ø)
.../transferprocess/TransferProcessApiController.java	90.00% <94.11%> (ø)
...aceconnector/common/statemachine/StateMachine.java	94.11% <100.00%> (-0.12%)	⬇️
...api/datamanagement/policy/PolicyApiController.java	80.64% <100.00%> (-0.61%)	⬇️
...ment/transferprocess/model/TransferRequestDto.java	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...rm/TransferRequestDtoToDataRequestTransformer.java	90.47% <100.00%> (+1.00%)	⬆️
... and 72 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 994cdd7...2bcadf4. Read the comment docs.

[algattik]

@ndr-brt @bscholtes1A thanks for the feedback, I've implemented "generating a random id if none is provided in the request" per this discussion.