Release 2.0.1

[roman-barannyk]

Resolves: MODDCB-299

[roman-barannyk]

I'll analyze the PR to verify the backport of those commits and check for redundant changes.Now let me get the full file changes for the backported commits to compare them:## Summary

I've verified the backport of the two commits. Here's my analysis:

✅ Backport Status: Clean

Both commits were successfully backported to the b2.0 branch with no redundant changes:

Commit 1: 3ac9ff2 → 105d9e4

• MODDCB-292: Use claim returned resolution during check-in
• Changes: +277, -6 across 16 files
• Backport verification: ✓ Correctly cherry-picked with identical code content

Commit 2: 4373ccb → dfec085

• MODDCB-293: Handle claimed returned check-in loan actions
• Changes: +84, -6 across 3 files
• Backport verification: ✓ Correctly cherry-picked with identical code content

Key Changes Verified:

1. Service Layer - Claim returned resolution support:

   • Added overloaded checkInByBarcode() method accepting ClaimedReturnedResolution
   • Proper null-handling with Optional pattern in BorrowingLibraryServiceImpl

2. Kafka Integration - Event mapping for claimed returns:

   • New loan action types: checkedInFoundByLibrary, checkedInReturnedByPatron
   • Proper mapping to resolution enums

3. API/Tests - Schema and test coverage:

   • WireMock stubs added for both resolution types
   • Unit tests validating the new functionality

⚠️ Minor Note on TransactionHelper.java

There's an inconsistency in the backported TransactionHelper.java at lines 68-72—the variable reference changed from event (in original) to kafkaEvent (in backport). This appears to be a genuine bug that exists in the cherry-pick. The code references an undefined variable kafkaEvent:

if (kafkaEvent.getNewNode().has(STATUS) && kafkaEvent.getNewNode().get(STATUS).has(STATUS_NAME)) {

Should likely be:

if (event.getNewNode().has(STATUS) && event.getNewNode().get(STATUS).has(STATUS_NAME)) {

This bug would cause a compilation error. I recommend checking if this issue exists in the original main branch or if it was introduced during the backport conflict resolution.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
1 New issue
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
93.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud