feat(secretmanager): add optional ttl to create secret sample

[alarconesparza]

Description

Fixes
Internal b/384051649

Note: Before submitting a pull request, please open an issue for discussion if you are not associated with Google.

Checklist

• I have followed Sample Format Guide
• pom.xml parent set to latest shared-configuration
• Appropriate changes to README are included in PR
• These samples need a new API enabled in testing projects to pass (let us know which ones)
• These samples need a new/updated env vars in testing projects set to pass (let us know which ones)
• Tests pass: mvn clean verify required
• Lint passes: mvn -P lint checkstyle:check required
• Static Analysis: mvn -P lint clean compile pmd:cpd-check spotbugs:check advisory only
• This sample adds a new sample directory, and I updated the CODEOWNERS file with the codeowners for this sample
• This sample adds a new Product API, and I updated the Blunderbuss issue/PR auto-assigner with the codeowners for this sample
• Please merge this PR for me once it is approved

[code-review-assist]

Hi @alarconesparza and reviewers,

I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my detailed review in a few minutes. In the meantime, here's a quick summary to help everyone get up to speed:

This pull request enhances the secretmanager sample by adding an optional Time-To-Live (TTL) parameter to the createSecret function. The intent is to provide users with more control over the lifecycle of their secrets, allowing them to specify an automatic deletion time.

Here's a breakdown of the changes:

• File Changed: secretmanager/src/main/java/secretmanager/CreateSecret.java
  • Lines Changed: 21-25, 41-60
  • Summary of Changes: The CreateSecret class now imports com.google.protobuf.Duration. A new Duration object, ttl, is created and set to 900 seconds (15 minutes). This ttl object is then added to the Secret object being created, giving the secret a 15-minute TTL. This means that secret versions will be automatically deleted after 15 minutes.

The changes are well-structured and clearly documented. The addition of the TTL option enhances the functionality of the sample and provides users with greater flexibility in managing their secrets.

---

And now, a little haiku to lighten the mood:

Secrets come and go,
TTL sets their fleeting time,
Code's clean, all is well.

[code-review-assist]

This pull request adds an optional TTL to the CreateSecret sample. This is a useful addition, making the sample more comprehensive. The implementation looks correct, but there are a few minor suggestions for improvement based on the provided Sample Format Guide and general Java best practices.

It's great that you've included the checklist in the description. Please ensure all items are checked before merging.

[code-review-assist]

Consider making the TTL configurable via a command-line argument or an environment variable. This would make the sample more flexible and allow users to experiment with different TTL values. This aligns with the Sample Format Guide's recommendation for user-provided parameters. For example, you could use System.getenv("SECRET_TTL") to read the TTL from an environment variable.

[code-review-assist]

It's good practice to validate user inputs, especially when they can affect the behavior of the system. If you make the TTL configurable, add validation to ensure the provided value is within an acceptable range and is a valid integer. For example, you might want to enforce a minimum and maximum TTL and handle potential NumberFormatException if the input is not a valid integer. This also aligns with the Sample Format Guide, which emphasizes clear error handling.

[iennae]

@alarconesparza apologies, but the committed change from the code-review-assist for the comment messed up the indentation, could you fix that in a an additional commit? Thank you!

[code-review-assist]

Hi @iennae, thanks for pointing out the indentation issue. I apologize for the formatting problem introduced by my previous suggestion. Unfortunately, I can't directly fix the code in the repository. Could you please re-commit the changes with the corrected indentation? Let me know if you need any further assistance.

[alarconesparza]

@alarconesparza apologies, but the committed change from the code-review-assist for the comment messed up the indentation, could you fix that in a an additional commit? Thank you!

Sure, let me update the comment message on my side and commit it with the correct identation

[code-review-assist]

Hi @alarconesparza, Great that you're addressing the indentation issue! To help ensure clarity for future contributors and reviewers, consider adding a comment in the code itself explaining the purpose of the ttl setting. For example, you could add a comment above the Duration ttl line similar to the existing comments explaining the purpose of the code. This will make the code easier to understand and maintain.