Skip to content

⚰️ server: drop unused bridge customer fields - #1012

Merged
cruzdanilo merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
deprecate
May 12, 2026
Merged

⚰️ server: drop unused bridge customer fields#1012
cruzdanilo merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
deprecate

Conversation

@mainqueg

@mainqueg mainqueg commented May 12, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Removed unused customer requirement fields from Bridge integration data handling.

Review Change Stack

@changeset-bot

changeset-bot Bot commented May 12, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: f1f382b

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 0 packages

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented May 12, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@mainqueg has exceeded the limit for the number of commits that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 48 minutes and 11 seconds before requesting another review.

You’ve run out of usage credits. Purchase more in the billing tab.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 2c75d15c-9810-4ac9-b221-2b26f71b51ec

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0b334d8 and f1f382b.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • .changeset/quiet-otter-rest.md
  • server/test/utils/bridge.test.ts
  • server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts

Walkthrough

The PR removes three unused Bridge customer fields (capabilities, future_requirements_due, requirements_due) from the schema validation, provider logic, and related tests. The changes reduce technical debt by eliminating dead code paths that were no longer used in the customer onboarding flow.

Changes

Remove Unused Bridge Customer Fields

Layer / File(s) Summary
Bridge CustomerResponse schema and constants cleanup
server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts
Deleted the CapabilitiesStatus constant and removed capabilities, future_requirements_due, and requirements_due from the CustomerResponse valibot schema validator.
Active provider logic cleanup
server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts
The getProvider function in the active provider case no longer checks or logs bridgeUser.future_requirements_due and bridgeUser.requirements_due.
Tests and release documentation
server/test/utils/bridge.test.ts, .changeset/quiet-otter-rest.md
Two test cases asserting captureException for the removed fields are deleted, and a changeset entry documents the removal as a patch-level version bump.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes

Possibly related PRs

  • exactly/exa#940: Both PRs modify server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts and related tests to change when captureException is called for Bridge customer handling.
  • exactly/exa#814: Both PRs directly modify server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts Bridge customer handling and CustomerResponse schema.
  • exactly/exa#896: Both PRs modify server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts and CustomerResponse schema.

Suggested reviewers

  • nfmelendez
  • cruzdanilo
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title accurately reflects the main objective of the changeset: removing unused Bridge customer fields (future_requirements_due, requirements_due, capabilities) from the server module.
Linked Issues check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch deprecate

Tip

💬 Introducing Slack Agent: The best way for teams to turn conversations into code.

Slack Agent is built on CodeRabbit's deep understanding of your code, so your team can collaborate across the entire SDLC without losing context.

  • Generate code and open pull requests
  • Plan features and break down work
  • Investigate incidents and troubleshoot customer tickets together
  • Automate recurring tasks and respond to alerts with triggers
  • Summarize progress and report instantly

Built for teams:

  • Shared memory across your entire org—no repeating context
  • Per-thread sandboxes to safely plan and execute work
  • Governance built-in—scoped access, auditability, and budget controls

One agent for your entire SDLC. Right inside Slack.

👉 Get started


Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request removes unused fields and logic related to Bridge customer requirements and capabilities. Key changes include the removal of future_requirements_due, requirements_due, capabilities, and rejection_reasons from the CustomerResponse schema, as well as the deletion of associated exception handling in the getProvider function and corresponding unit tests. I have no feedback to provide.

@coderabbitai coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1


ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: ab499932-f80d-451d-9419-5704846b1ff0

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 9b1bb01 and 0b334d8.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • .changeset/quiet-otter-rest.md
  • server/test/utils/bridge.test.ts
  • server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (2)
  • server/test/utils/bridge.test.ts
  • server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts

Comment thread .changeset/quiet-otter-rest.md Outdated
@mainqueg
mainqueg marked this pull request as ready for review May 12, 2026 13:33

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: f1f382b23f

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts
@sentry

sentry Bot commented May 12, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 72.23%. Comparing base (9b1bb01) to head (f1f382b).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1012      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   71.93%   72.23%   +0.30%     
==========================================
  Files         240      240              
  Lines        9392     9519     +127     
  Branches     3031     3082      +51     
==========================================
+ Hits         6756     6876     +120     
- Misses       2368     2369       +1     
- Partials      268      274       +6     
Flag Coverage Δ
e2e 72.23% <ø> (+4.53%) ⬆️

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:
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@cruzdanilo
cruzdanilo merged commit f1f382b into main May 12, 2026
11 of 12 checks passed
@cruzdanilo
cruzdanilo deleted the deprecate branch May 12, 2026 21:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants