AdbreakId support for smaato bidder #986
Conversation
| if adbreakID, ok := getString(params.FieldMap["adbreakId"]); ok { | ||
| fmt.Fprintf(&jsonStr, `,"adbreakId":"%s"`, adbreakID) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Pubmatic-Supriya-Patil : Have we checked on impact if both adbreakid and adspaceid are passed on to Smaato adapter in adapter code? Whether both are passed to bidder?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As discussed , only one field will be used based on type of request.
| @@ -2045,7 +2045,7 @@ func TestPrepareBidParamJSONForPartnerSmaato(t *testing.T) { | |||
| want: nil, | |||
| }, | |||
| { | |||
| name: "All params are present", | |||
| name: "publisherId_adspaceId_both_are_present", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Pubmatic-Supriya-Patil : What is the change in this test case?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Previously all params means publisher Id and adspace Id. now we added adbreakId as new field so just renamed test case name accordingly.
| @@ -2060,6 +2060,66 @@ func TestPrepareBidParamJSONForPartnerSmaato(t *testing.T) { | |||
| }, | |||
| want: json.RawMessage(`{"publisherId": "1234","adspaceId": "3456"}`), | |||
| }, | |||
| { | |||
| name: "All_params_are_present", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Pubmatic-Supriya-Patil : why have we introduced new test case. The test case with this name was present before, as per last review comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This new test case is for publisherId, adspaceId and adbreakId. Previous one was only for publisherId and adspaceId
…smaato-adbreakId-support
| if adspaceID, ok := getString(params.FieldMap["adspaceId"]); !ok { | ||
| return nil, fmt.Errorf(errMandatoryParameterMissingFormat, params.AdapterName, "adspaceId") | ||
| } else { | ||
| fmt.Fprintf(&jsonStr, `"adspaceId":"%s"`, adspaceID) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Pubmatic-Supriya-Patil : I think we should stick to any of rule here. It means, ensure either adspaceid or adbreakid is present , instead o removing the validation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
API will handle this validation while uploading mapping so no need to have same logic here
Description
Please add change description or link to ticket, docs, etc.
Checklist:
header-biddingrepo with appropiate commit id.For Prebid upgrade, refer: https://inside.pubmatic.com:8443/confluence/display/Products/Prebid-server+upgrade