Support injecting OIDC WireMockServer into tests

[dimas-b]

• Define a custom annotation: InjectWireMock

• Override inject(TestInjector) in OidcWiremockTestResource
  to allow tests to receive the WireMockServer
  used by OidcWiremockTestResource

This is to allow (external) tests to mock
extra URLs, that are not covered by OidcWiremockTestResource

---

If this PR is accepted, please consider back-porting to Quarkus 2.2.x

[sberyozkin]

Hi @dimas-b, thanks for this PR - does the test pass with -Dnative ? Also, perhaps the existing oidc client or oidc test can be enhanced a little bit to show for the users to see how it can be practically applied and for it to be documented as well ?

@stuartwdouglas Can you also have a look please ? May be instantiating TestResourceManager can be avoided somehow (unless in the PR test it is only instantiated to show the injection is working) ?

Thanks

[dimas-b]

May be instantiating TestResourceManager can be avoided somehow [...]

My understanding is that TestResourceManager is triggered from the JUnit 5 extension, which is currently not a dependency of the test-framework module and I did not want to introduce a new dependency for this PR.

If there's a better way to trigger the injection logic - by all means please let me know and I will update this PR.

[dimas-b]

does the test pass with -Dnative ?

It does, although I do not think this flag makes a real difference since the test does not actually bring a full Quarkus server up.

[dimas-b]

@sberyozkin :

perhaps the existing oidc client or oidc test can be enhanced a little bit to show for the users to see how it can be practically applied and for it to be documented as well ?

I've pushed another commit to add a test with an invalid toke to BearerTokenAuthorizationTest : 0ac955d. This is the use case that prompted me to open this PR, actually.

Is this what you meant for providing a practical example?

[sberyozkin]

@dimas-b thanks, looks good with a new test. Can you please squash the commits ?

One other question, do you think it can make sense to drop Inject from InjectWireMock since it is implied and have only WireMock ? I don't really mind if it stays as InjectWireMock but I'm not sure we have any other marker annotation in Quarkus with the Injectin its name indicating the target has to be injected. I'll let you decide if you'd like to keep it or not...

Thanks

[dimas-b]

@sberyozkin : There's already a io.quarkus.it.hibernate.search.elasticsearch.aws.InjectWireMock for a similar use case, so I followed that pattern. I'm ok to rename though. How about OidcWireMock since it works in concert with OidcWiremockTestResource.

I'll squash as soon as we settle on a name for the annotation :)

[sberyozkin]

@dimas-b Sorry, missed your last comment, I see, following the same pattern if it is already used in one other place in Quarkus makes sense, though I also like your idea of naming it as OidcWireMock as the wire mock itself is offered by the test resource factory with its name starting with Oidc - so if it works for you then please rename and squash and we'll merge, thanks

[dimas-b]

Renamed, squashed and rebased

[sberyozkin]

@dimas-b thanks for your PR. I'll follow up with a doc update as I don't want to hold this PR any longer. (if you can find some time - please do a small example to https://quarkus.io/guides/security-openid-connect#integration-testing-wiremock to introduce this option)

[dimas-b]

Follow-up docs PR: #20118

[dimas-b]

@sberyozkin : Would it be possible to backport this to 2.2.x?