Azure Blob Storage, Azure File Share and SharePoint Online Connector Apps

[IceOnly]

This PR contains three new connector apps, to connect Azure Blob Storage, Azure File Share and SharePoint Online with the New File System Module in the System App.

File System Module PR:
microsoft/BCApps#663

Here are some Screenshots:

Fixes #22691
Fixes AB#559148

[pri-kise]

Some general thoughts:
I think we need some kind of path serparated from the name added to the file account content.
It's often very important to know the path.

Additionally we might need some additional kind of top level selection before List Directories:
I'm thinking about a webservice for local file system access, there we should be able to select the Drive "C:" or "D:".
For Azure File Share we should be able to select the File Share on a top level before searching directories and files.

Further more if I take a look at the current sharepoint client. I have no idea how we should map this to the current provided
interface "File Connector".
https://github.com/microsoft/ALAppExtensions/blob/main/Modules/System/SharePoint/src/SharePointClient.Codeunit.al

Sometimes a path isn't enough and we might need more information to download a file.
Maybe this info could be added to the table 70005 "File Account Content" table and the interface "File Connector" could accept a "File Account Content" as parameter instead of a path....

Maybe someone else with more experience has some ideas how this access can be unified...

[IceOnly]

Some general thoughts: I think we need some kind of path serparated from the name added to the file account content. It's often very important to know the path.

Additionally we might need some additional kind of top level selection before List Directories: I'm thinking about a webservice for local file system access, there we should be able to select the Drive "C:" or "D:". For Azure File Share we should be able to select the File Share on a top level before searching directories and files.

Further more if I take a look at the current sharepoint client. I have no idea how we should map this to the current provided interface "File Connector". https://github.com/microsoft/ALAppExtensions/blob/main/Modules/System/SharePoint/src/SharePointClient.Codeunit.al

Sometimes a path isn't enough and we might need more information to download a file. Maybe this info could be added to the table 70005 "File Account Content" table and the interface "File Connector" could accept a "File Account Content" as parameter instead of a path....

Maybe someone else with more experience has some ideas how this access can be unified...

Why not listing C: and D: as directory on the top level?
The path is part of the Fiel Acount Content table. It is splitted in Parent Folder and Name.

However, I am not sure if the module should define the path separator. So all Services uses the same path structure and the implentation need to translate if needed.

[PeterConijn]

Looks cool! I have a few small performance and security concerns, which I have addressed, and some minor other stuff, but nothing major. I'm excited for this.

[JesperSchulz]

Let me amplify this on Twitter/X to get your initial question answered: "before I go round the whole thing, I'm interested in whether there is any interest in the module at all". Let's see what people have to say! 😊

[tinfister]

I support every effort to improve file handling.

[dNsl9r]

Wonderful! Please merge this 👍🏻

[miljance]

Easily overlooked feature but a needed one. Huge development effort that should not be thrown away.
Perhaps I will find some time to invest in contribution from my side but cannot make promises at the moment.

[TheDoubleH]

Bravo! Love seeing more 'helper' features/functions that eventually will benefit all of us!

[JesperSchulz]

@IceOnly, this PR seems to have stagnated a little (which is perfectly fine). I was just wondering if you want to push this forward at some point, or if you've changed your mind / cannot find the time? There seems to be plenty of interest for this module in the community!

[IceOnly]

@IceOnly, this PR seems to have stagnated a little (which is perfectly fine). I was just wondering if you want to push this forward at some point, or if you've changed your mind / cannot find the time? There seems to be plenty of interest for this module in the community!

It is the time. I will try to find some free time to make the last changes.

This are my open points:

• I am struggling with the wist from pri-kise to split the Main Interface in logic interfaces like one for File, one for Directory and one for Account access. I like the Idea to implement one Interface and you are done.
• I will try to implement a realy simple pagination interface. The Most file services uses realy different methods for getting the next batch. So i will only alow the implemntation to result a pagination codeunit that can store the inforamtion it needs to get the next batch. How big a batch is can only be defined by the implementation.

[JesperSchulz]

Feel free to do it at your own pace. I didn't mean to stress you. I was just curious if you still intend to continue work. If you do, we'll just leave this PR open. No problem whatsoever.

[JesperSchulz]

None of the open comments prevent us from creating a first iteration of the connector apps. I will open an internal PR to get reviews from Microsoft started.

[JesperSchulz]

@IceOnly, so far, so good. Build on GitHub is passing, internal build is now passing - in theory, I could submit the code!

However, with 0 tests I will probably have a hard time getting any sign-offs. I get that these apps only connect the tested module to tested API helper modules, but we would probably still need tests to verify the basic capabilities. Ideally we'd have mocks, but those aren't ready for showtime yet.

You don't happen to have a test or 10 lying around for this code, do you?

[IceOnly]

@IceOnly, so far, so good. Build on GitHub is passing, internal build is now passing - in theory, I could submit the code!

However, with 0 tests I will probably have a hard time getting any sign-offs. I get that these apps only connect the tested module to tested API helper modules, but we would probably still need tests to verify the basic capabilities. Ideally we'd have mocks, but those aren't ready for showtime yet.

You don't happen to have a test or 10 lying around for this code, do you?

@jesper I added some test. I selected some random ids (not fully random i prefixed the id Ranges of the Apps with 14), maybe I have to move the id of the test app.

[JesperSchulz]

@IceOnly, so far, so good. Build on GitHub is passing, internal build is now passing - in theory, I could submit the code!
However, with 0 tests I will probably have a hard time getting any sign-offs. I get that these apps only connect the tested module to tested API helper modules, but we would probably still need tests to verify the basic capabilities. Ideally we'd have mocks, but those aren't ready for showtime yet.
You don't happen to have a test or 10 lying around for this code, do you?

@jesper I added some test. I selected some random ids (not fully random i prefixed the id Ranges of the Apps with 14), maybe I have to move the id of the test app.

I have changed two IDs, which were conflicting. The other 4 seem fine. Let me run your changes in our internal pipeline and let's see what comes out of that! We're getting there 😊

[JesperSchulz]

Some minor issues left before we can merge :-)

[tinestaric]

We found another use case that would be nice to cover, but doesn't block this PR. This is more just dropping the idea for the future.

Using a Certificate to authenticate the Sharepoint connector. I see there already is a helper function for it in the SharepointAuth, so it's mainly about a way to store the certificate and password.

[IceOnly]

We found another use case that would be nice to cover, but doesn't block this PR. This is more just dropping the idea for the future.

Using a Certificate to authenticate the Sharepoint connector. I see there already is a helper function for it in the SharepointAuth, so it's mainly about a way to store the certificate and password.

We already discuss this in the past. I will add it after the base ist released.

[JesperSchulz]

Code has been merged internally 🥳 The apps are ready for release with 2025 wave 1! I will do some extensive testing on a release candidate, when we get that far, but other than that, it's a wrap!