[Bug] Property or field 'appId' cannot be found on object of type 'org.apache.streampark.console.core.entity.FlinkApplication' #4281
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.



There are two errors in the annotation configuration of the flinkStart / flinkCancel method:
This annotation binds the value of parameter id to the appId field of the FlinkApplication object. However, the FlinkApplication class does not have an appId field; the actual field name is id. This will result in ineffective data binding.
This expression attempts to access the appId property of the FlinkApplication object. Since the FlinkApplication class doesn't have an appId field, it will throw the exception: Property or field 'appId' cannot be found on object of type 'org.apache.streampark.console.core.entity.FlinkApplication'
What changes were proposed in this pull request
Issue Number: close #4121
Brief change log
Remove the bindFor = "appId" attribute from the @openapi.
Change @PermissionScope(app = "#app.appId") to @PermissionScope(app = "#app.id")
Caused by location:
at org.apache.streampark.console.core.aspect.PermissionAspect.getId(PermissionAspect.java:118)
Verifying this change
This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.
Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts