Public Release for Fall24 meta-release

[bigludo7]

What type of PR is this?

Add one of the following kinds:

• subproject management

What this PR does / why we need it:

Related to #58

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #

Special notes for reviewers:

In the changelog I've added the elements from the v0.5.0 that were missing.
Missing link for Test Statement

Changelog input

Public release one-time-password-sms v1.0.0

Additional documentation

This section can be blank.

docs

[github-actions]

🦙 MegaLinter status: ✅ SUCCESS

Descriptor	Linter	Files	Fixed	Errors	Elapsed time
✅ ACTION	actionlint	2		0	0.03s
✅ OPENAPI	spectral	1		0	1.68s
✅ REPOSITORY	git_diff	yes		no	0.01s
✅ REPOSITORY	secretlint	yes		no	0.7s
✅ YAML	yamllint	1		0	0.33s

See detailed report in MegaLinter reports

MegaLinter is graciously provided by

[hdamker]

Line 1 of the feature file is Feature: CAMARA OTPvalidationAPI, v:wip - should be updated

[bigludo7]

Line 1 of the feature file is Feature: CAMARA OTPvalidationAPI, v:wip - should be updated

Fixed ! Thanks

[hdamker]

Please replace the text underneath the Readiness checklist table with the latest version from https://github.com/camaraproject/ReleaseManagement/blob/main/documentation/API-Readiness-Checklist.md

As also mentioned in camaraproject/Commonalities#266 (comment)

[hdamker]

So far what I've seen, rest LGTM. Please add @camaraproject/release-management_maintainers as reviewer to trigger the official review by Release Management and remove me as reviewer.

[bigludo7]

So far what I've seen, rest LGTM. Please add @camaraproject/release-management_maintainers as reviewer to trigger the official review by Release Management and remove me as reviewer.

Thanks a lot for Herbert for the very helpful review!

[fernandopradocabrillo]

Thanks @bigludo7 and @hdamker !

[hdamker]

@bigludo7 @fernandopradocabrillo Could you please check if the comment in camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement#189 (comment) is relevant for the API spec?

[bigludo7]

@bigludo7 @fernandopradocabrillo Could you please check if the comment in camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement#189 (comment) is relevant for the API spec?

For me, and understood that @jpengar has same conclusion, the 403 INVALID_TOKEN_CONTEXT error is not relevant for the OTP validation API as if the phone number is in the token the API is useless. Indeed this API UC is to be use when we cannot detect the phone number by ourselves. But perhaps i miss something.

[hdamker]

For me, and understood that @jpengar has same conclusion, the 403 INVALID_TOKEN_CONTEXT error is not relevant for the OTP validation API as if the phone number is in the token the API is useless. Indeed this API UC is to be use when we cannot detect the phone number by ourselves. But perhaps i miss something.

All good for me, I just wanted to be sure that the conclusion of @jpenpar is shared here.

[hdamker]

.feature file - change of 36 lines needed:
/one-time-password-sms/v0/send-code -> /one-time-password-sms/v1/send-code
/one-time-password-sms/v0/validate-code -> /one-time-password-sms/v1/validate-code

[hdamker]

Checklist needs small updates & and a TSC decision about the missing prerequisite (which then can be added as comment).

[bigludo7]

@hdamker Managed the test statement in the checklist.

[fernandopradocabrillo]

LGTM

[hdamker]

LGTM on behalf of @camaraproject/release-management_maintainers. Let's create the release.