convert filter argument in resource access list to string from SimpleName

[havetisyan]

Description

the filter argument was defined as SimpleName which is too restrictive. If we want to filter on gcp project id that has value, for example, "abc:prod.project", the validation fails since that's not a simple name. it was converted to String for better support.

Contribution Checklist:

• The pull request does not introduce any breaking changes
• I have read the contribution guidelines.
• Create an issue and link to the pull request.

Attach Screenshots (Optional)

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @havetisyan, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request enhances the flexibility of the GetResourceAccessList API by broadening the accepted type for its filter argument. Previously restricted to SimpleName, which limited filter values to simple identifiers, the argument now accepts a generic String type. This modification enables the use of more complex filter patterns, such as those containing special characters, thereby improving the utility and robustness of resource access filtering.

Highlights

• API Signature Update: The filter argument in the GetResourceAccessList function has been updated from SimpleName to string (or String in schema definitions) across the Go client, Java schema, and RDL definition.
• Increased Flexibility: This change allows the filter argument to accept more complex string values, such as 'abc:prod.project', which were previously rejected due to the restrictive SimpleName validation.
• Client-side Adaptation: The Go CLI client (libs/go/zmscli/access.go) has been modified to reflect this change, passing the filter argument directly as a string without a SimpleName type assertion.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request correctly changes the type of the filter argument in the resource access list functionality from SimpleName to String. This change is necessary to support more complex filter values, such as GCP project IDs, which were previously restricted by the SimpleName pattern. The modification has been consistently applied across the RDL schema, the generated Go and Java client code, and the Go CLI client. The implementation is sound and effectively resolves the described limitation. I have no further comments.