changes.go: fix json key

[flokli]

At least the key in ChangeInfo is called wip, not work_in_progress:

{"uploader":{"name":"Florian Klink","email":"flokli@flokli.de","username":"flokli"},"patchSet":{"number":1,"revision":"ede307a009aa0b1eb62e9f18b7bf1f26e9fc98a9","parents":["9f8fb55318f2bafb37e4587fa4b6c793b2b540c0"],"ref":"refs/changes/25/30525/1","uploader":{"name":"Florian Klink","email":"flokli@flokli.de","username":"flokli"},"createdOn":1747335735,"author":{"name":"Florian Klink","email":"flokli@flokli.de","username":"flokli"},"kind":"REWORK","sizeInsertions":11,"sizeDeletions":1545},"change":{"project":"snix","branch":"canon","id":"If8faecdd018b45dd087b7332fe3d3a8280947358","number":30525,"subject":"fix(ops): drop clbot","owner":{"name":"Florian Klink","email":"flokli@flokli.de","username":"flokli"},"url":"https://cl.snix.dev/c/snix/+/30525","commitMessage":"fix(ops): drop clbot\n\nThis removes the old clbot, which kept an SSH connection to gerrit open.\n\nChange-Id: If8faecdd018b45dd087b7332fe3d3a8280947358\n","createdOn":1747335735,"status":"NEW","wip":true},"project":"snix","refName":"refs/heads/canon","changeKey":{"id":"If8faecdd018b45dd087b7332fe3d3a8280947358"},"type":"patchset-created","eventCreatedOn":1747335735}

(This is an example of what I received via gerrit stream-events)

[andygrunwald]

@flokli Which version of Gerrit you are using?
The docs in https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/rest-api-changes.html#change-info say the key is names work_in_progress.

[flokli]

It's 3.11.0. I also noticed _number is called number there, not number.

I'm not sure the REST API looks exactly the same as what gerrit stream-events emits. Are there expected to be differences?

[andygrunwald]

See https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/cmd-stream-events.html#events and https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/json.html#change

It looks like these events follow a different structure than the REST API.
Right now, this library do not support the structures of Stream-Events (afaik).

I am happy to receive a PR towards this.

[flokli]

Ugh, this being separate (but similarly named) types is unfortunate.

How would you propose to handle this? Just add additional structs, named like in the documentation? Putting it in a separate (sub) package to avoid clashes?

[andygrunwald]

I don't know exactly, as i do not have experience with stream-events.
From the first view, a separate package stream or streamevents or similar sounds useful. This way, we can use the original names and avoid name conflicts.

This package can start with the data structures itself and later on, developed towards a proper client to use.

What do you think?

[flokli]

Closing in favor of #189