Removal of internal ID in backup event descriptions

[Tonitzpp]

Description

Currently, the description of backup events contains the backup's internal ID, displaying sensitive content to users. This PR changes the events description to use the backup's UUID instead.

Types of changes

• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
• Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
• Build/CI
• Test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

• Major
• Minor

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Before the changes:

After the changes:

How Has This Been Tested?

After changing the code, I compiled the code and installed the packages to my lab. Then, I created a VM to perform the tests and assigned it a backup offering. After that, I created a test backup, restored it, and deleted it. When the Events tab was accessed, I validated that the events displayed the backup's UUID, instead of its internal ID.

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

[DaanHoogland]

clgtm

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 17.60%. Comparing base (40d21f0) to head (475bbd0).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...stack/api/command/user/backup/CreateBackupCmd.java	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
...stack/api/command/user/backup/DeleteBackupCmd.java	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
...tack/api/command/user/backup/RestoreBackupCmd.java	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #12197      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     17.60%   17.60%   -0.01%     
  Complexity    15669    15669              
============================================
  Files          5915     5915              
  Lines        529964   529967       +3     
  Branches      64734    64734              
============================================
  Hits          93305    93305              
- Misses       426191   426194       +3     
  Partials      10468    10468              

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	3.58% <ø> (ø)
unittests	18.67% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[abh1sar]

code lgtm

[sureshanaparti]

clgtm

[sureshanaparti]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@sureshanaparti a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 15946

[github-actions]

This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch.

[DaanHoogland]

@blueorangutan package

[DaanHoogland]

@weizhouapache @winterhazel , do you think we need more than smoke tests for this one?

[blueorangutan]

@DaanHoogland a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with no SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 16194

[winterhazel]

@weizhouapache @winterhazel , do you think we need more than smoke tests for this one?

@DaanHoogland smoke tests should be enough here

[DaanHoogland]

@blueorangutan test

[blueorangutan]

@DaanHoogland a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

[blueorangutan]

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-15080)
Environment: kvm-ol8 (x2), zone: Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8
Total time taken: 52296 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr12197-t15080-kvm-ol8.zip
Smoke tests completed. 149 look OK, 1 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File
test_03_deploy_and_scale_kubernetes_cluster	Failure	31.89	test_kubernetes_clusters.py

[boring-cyborg]

Awesome work, congrats on your first merged pull request!