FINERACT-2255: New command processing - external Assets Owner (org.apache.fineract.investor)

[elnafateh]

Description

New command processing - external Assets Owner

Checklist

Please make sure these boxes are checked before submitting your pull request - thanks!

• [] Write the commit message as per our guidelines
• [] Acknowledge that we will not review PRs that are not passing the build ("green") - it is your responsibility to get a proposed PR to pass the build, not primarily the project's maintainers.
• [] Create/update unit or integration tests for verifying the changes made.
• [] Follow our coding conventions.
• [] Add required Swagger annotation and update API documentation at fineract-provider/src/main/resources/static/legacy-docs/apiLive.htm with details of any API changes
• [] This PR must not be a "code dump". Large changes can be made in a branch, with assistance. Ask for help on the developer mailing list.

Your assigned reviewer(s) will follow our guidelines for code reviews.

[elnafateh]

@adamsaghy kindly rerun test on the failed check "E2E Tests (Shard 8 of 15)". thanks

[elnafateh]

@adamsaghy @vidakovic pls do review this PR when u have the time, thanks

[vidakovic]

@elnafateh ... this PR is missing the goal of the refactoring... I don't see anywhere the new CommandDispatch being used... please read instructions again or contact me. As is can't be merged.

[elnafateh]

@vidakovic thanks for the feedback. I have read (studied) Instruction again for both parent FINERACT-2169 and the child FINERACT-2255 Tickets. Now here's my Initial plan to completing FINERACT-2255 remaining work. Since the description Itemized the work from 1-6, with item 1. PR #451 covering some parts item 1, I intended to complete item 2. PR #5773 which only treats everything "READ" and then open another PR for item 3. Treat everything "WRITE" which is where "new CommandDispatch" is gonna come in and so does the rest of them items, each will have seperate PR under same ticket.. what do u make of this approach? your feedback is essential!

[vidakovic]

@elnafateh I'd do this in one PR... splitting this up doesn't really help and probably creates more confusion. Just look at one of the completed tickets under FINERACT-2169 (I suggest "notes", dead easy)... that gives you a template on what and how to do this.

[elnafateh]

@vidakovic I have started the impl based on the approach you suggested.

[elnafateh]

@vidakovic the shared POST /transfers/loans/{loanId}?command=sale|buyback|intermediarySale endpoint makes it difficult to apply Jakarta Validation cleanly since each command has different required fields.
Am thinking options:
(1) keep the shared endpoint and use a class-level custom validator,
(2) split into separate endpoints per operation for cleaner validation, maintaining backward compatibility by keeping the old endpoint as deprecated. what do u prefer? Or is there any other way around?

[elnafateh]

@vidakovic kindly review the update