Refactor CORS config; add architectural commentary
Refactored CORS setup to be environment-aware, restricting origins in production and relaxing in development. Added extensive comments and discussion on service and repository layer design, including clean architecture best practices and CQRS/MediatR considerations. No changes to business logic; documentation and intent clarified for maintainers.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -14,20 +14,22 @@ builder.Services.AddEndpointsApiExplorer();
|
|||||||
builder.Services.AddSwaggerGen();
|
builder.Services.AddSwaggerGen();
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
// TODO: allow listed origins configured in appsettings.json
|
// TODO: allow listed origins configured in appsettings.json
|
||||||
|
// In any case, dont let them to free to use without cors. if there is no origin specified, block all.
|
||||||
|
// In development you can keep it easy.
|
||||||
builder.Services.AddCors(options =>
|
builder.Services.AddCors(options =>
|
||||||
{
|
{
|
||||||
var origins = builder.Configuration.GetSection("Cors:AllowedOrigins").Get<string[]>() ?? Array.Empty<string>();
|
|
||||||
options.AddDefaultPolicy(policy =>
|
options.AddDefaultPolicy(policy =>
|
||||||
{
|
{
|
||||||
if (origins.Length > 0)
|
if(builder.Environment.IsDevelopment())
|
||||||
{
|
{
|
||||||
policy.WithOrigins(origins)
|
policy.AllowAnyOrigin()
|
||||||
.AllowAnyHeader()
|
.AllowAnyHeader()
|
||||||
.AllowAnyMethod();
|
.AllowAnyMethod();
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
else
|
else
|
||||||
{
|
{
|
||||||
policy.AllowAnyOrigin()
|
var origins = builder.Configuration.GetSection("Cors:AllowedOrigins").Get<string[]>() ?? [];
|
||||||
|
policy.WithOrigins(origins)
|
||||||
.AllowAnyHeader()
|
.AllowAnyHeader()
|
||||||
.AllowAnyMethod();
|
.AllowAnyMethod();
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
|||||||
@@ -21,7 +21,17 @@ Cons/Practical here:
|
|||||||
Conclusion: For this solution a generic service would be more overhead than benefit. If you later have multiple very similar entities without special logic,
|
Conclusion: For this solution a generic service would be more overhead than benefit. If you later have multiple very similar entities without special logic,
|
||||||
you could consider a lightweight generic interface/base; for now, the specialized service implementation is cleaner. */
|
you could consider a lightweight generic interface/base; for now, the specialized service implementation is cleaner. */
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
/* Hakan's Response:
|
||||||
|
* No, it absolutely makes sense to create a generic service using Options pattern. So, you can easily inject your SQL queries or stored procedure names via configuration.
|
||||||
|
* see: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/extensions/options
|
||||||
|
*/
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
//TODO: implement CQRS pattern with MediatR
|
//TODO: implement CQRS pattern with MediatR
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
/* Hakan's response
|
||||||
|
* Here is the main part. We dont even need a service layer if we implement CQRS with MediatR at least for CRUD operations.
|
||||||
|
*/
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
public class CatalogService : ICatalogService
|
public class CatalogService : ICatalogService
|
||||||
{
|
{
|
||||||
private readonly ICatalogRepository _repository;
|
private readonly ICatalogRepository _repository;
|
||||||
|
|||||||
@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
|
|||||||
using DbFirst.Domain.Entities;
|
using DbFirst.Domain.Entities;
|
||||||
|
using System.Runtime.Intrinsics.X86;
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
namespace DbFirst.Domain.Repositories;
|
namespace DbFirst.Domain.Repositories;
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@@ -11,6 +12,12 @@ A generic Repository<T> isn’t really worthwhile here:
|
|||||||
• Operations aren’t symmetric (separate procs for insert/update/delete with output handling and reload), so a one-size-fits-all CRUD pattern doesn’t fit well.
|
• Operations aren’t symmetric (separate procs for insert/update/delete with output handling and reload), so a one-size-fits-all CRUD pattern doesn’t fit well.
|
||||||
• Better to keep the specialized repo.If you want reuse, extract small helpers (e.g., for proc calls/output parameters/reload) instead of forcing a generic repository. */
|
• Better to keep the specialized repo.If you want reuse, extract small helpers (e.g., for proc calls/output parameters/reload) instead of forcing a generic repository. */
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
/* Hakan's Response:
|
||||||
|
* I think it still makes sense. An execute SQL method can be added to repository. The relevant SQL can be executed in the application layer.
|
||||||
|
* Because the application layer is no longer dependent on a method like CreateAsync. It is now directly dependent on that procedure.
|
||||||
|
*/
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
// TODO: move to application layer as a part of clean architecture
|
// TODO: move to application layer as a part of clean architecture
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
/* Copilot's Response:
|
/* Copilot's Response:
|
||||||
@@ -22,6 +29,12 @@ A generic Repository<T> isn’t really worthwhile here:
|
|||||||
Con: If Domain logic needs repos, it would depend on Application, weakening the layer separation.
|
Con: If Domain logic needs repos, it would depend on Application, weakening the layer separation.
|
||||||
Recommendation: Keep the interface in Domain. It’s conventional, clean, and avoids a Domain -> Application dependency. Implementation stays in Infrastructure. */
|
Recommendation: Keep the interface in Domain. It’s conventional, clean, and avoids a Domain -> Application dependency. Implementation stays in Infrastructure. */
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
/* Hakan's Response:
|
||||||
|
* I don't think there's any point in keeping repository interfaces in the domain layer. These interfaces will be used in the application layer, not the domain layer.
|
||||||
|
* Furthermore, this is how they are used in the most popular clean architecture pattern.
|
||||||
|
* See: https://github.com/jasontaylordev/CleanArchitecture/blob/main/src/Infrastructure/Identity/IdentityService.cs
|
||||||
|
*/
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
public interface ICatalogRepository
|
public interface ICatalogRepository
|
||||||
{
|
{
|
||||||
Task<List<VwmyCatalog>> GetAllAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken = default);
|
Task<List<VwmyCatalog>> GetAllAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken = default);
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user