SRM id is missing in challenge-types endpoint

[luizrrodrigues]

https://api.topcoder-dev.com/v5/challenge-types

Currently this is hardcoded in the config file of community-app.
SRM_TYPE_ID: '7494c009-b425-45c5-923a-fd3a6ace3196',

Also if use this ID to filter by typeId, the return is empty:
https://api.topcoder-dev.com/v5/challenges?typeId=7494c009-b425-45c5-923a-fd3a6ace3196

[luizrrodrigues]

@rootelement

[rootelement]

When we populated the challenge types, we pulled the values from:
https://api.topcoder-dev.com/v4/challenge-types

I don't see SRM as a type there. I could go into the db and pull it. Give me a little bit to dig around.

[rootelement]

@ajefts can you weigh in here? I'm not sure what we're supposed to do if there's no type for an SRM.

[ajefts]

There was never a concept of a type for SRMs in that data model since it's a completely separate data model. I know the current site uses https://api.topcoder.com/v4/srms/ to get SRMs.

[rootelement]

Calls for SRMs will have to stay pointed at v4. This was supposed to be broken out into its own API but hasn't been.
cc: @cwdcwd

[luizrrodrigues]

@rootelement So to confirm here, we going to use API v5 to get SRMs?

[rootelement]

No, we'll have to remain calling the v4 api for now until this is taken care of at a later date.

…

On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 10:02 AM Luiz Ricardo Rodrigues < ***@***.***> wrote: @rootelement <https://github.com/rootelement> So to confirm here, we going to use API v5 to get SRMs? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#131 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABJGMXHPUF4YNUPLVDGMDRLRUUA7HANCNFSM4NIUXKDQ> .

-- James Cori Lead Software Engineer [email protected] / 413.961.9044 / @jamesmcori <https://twitter.com/jamesmcori> <[email protected]>www.topcoder.com <http://topcoder.com/> / Topcoder Blog: topcoder.com/blog / twitter: @topcoder <https://twitter.com/topcoder>201 S Capitol Ave, Indianapolis, IN 46225

[rootelement]

@sushilshinde This is not an api issue. This is a function of a different api. V4 will remain for now.

[sushilshinde]

Yes we agree on that