Change internal ID to UUID in user disable event

[erikbocks]

Description

During the user disablement process, created events contain the user internal ID instead of the user UUID. Therefore, this PR fixes this behaviour by changing the internal ID in the event descriptions to the user's UUID.

Types of changes

• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
• Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
• Build/CI
• Test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Bug Severity

• BLOCKER
• Critical
• Major
• Minor
• Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

I built the packages with the changes and applied them to my local environment. In Apache CloudStack, I created a new user user in the admin account, then disabled it. In the events, I validated that the user's UUID were shown instead of the user's internal ID.

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 17.56%. Comparing base (ec533cd) to head (b775848).
⚠️ Report is 249 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...udstack/api/command/admin/user/DisableUserCmd.java	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #11824      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     17.42%   17.56%   +0.13%     
- Complexity    15336    15498     +162     
============================================
  Files          5892     5899       +7     
  Lines        526521   527793    +1272     
  Branches      64293    64479     +186     
============================================
+ Hits          91767    92703     +936     
- Misses       424401   424666     +265     
- Partials      10353    10424      +71     

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	3.59% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️
unittests	18.62% <0.00%> (+0.14%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[DaanHoogland]

clgtm

[vishesh92]

clgtm. didn't test.

[DaanHoogland]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@DaanHoogland a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✖️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 15432

[DaanHoogland]

@blueorangutan test

[blueorangutan]

@DaanHoogland a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

[blueorangutan]

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-14701)
Environment: kvm-ol8 (x2), zone: Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8
Total time taken: 51596 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr11824-t14701-kvm-ol8.zip
Smoke tests completed. 149 look OK, 0 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File

[bernardodemarco]

lgtm, I manually tested it in a local environment: