✨ server: add future requirement to bridge by mainqueg · Pull Request #1071 · exactly/exa

mainqueg · 2026-06-04T13:48:54Z

Summary by CodeRabbit

New Features
- Bridge provider details now include an optional future KYC link (URL + effective date) for upcoming requirements within a configured future window.
Tests
- Added tests covering selection, timing, aggregation, and error handling for future KYC link behavior, including cases where the field is explicitly undefined.
Chores
- Added a release changeset recording a patch bump for the future KYC link update.

changeset-bot · 2026-06-04T13:49:00Z

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 149d39f

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

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package

Name	Type
@exactly/server	Patch

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

sentry · 2026-06-04T13:49:25Z

❌ 1 Tests Failed:

Tests completed	Failed	Passed	Skipped
1107	1	1106	1

View the full list of 1 ❄️ flaky test(s)

local::local
Flake rate in main: 86.21% (Passed 4 times, Failed 25 times)
Stack Traces | 310s run time
Assertion is false: "\$[\s\d,.\xa0]+, AVAILABLE BALANCE" is visible

gemini-code-assist

Code Review

This pull request adds support for a future KYC link in the Bridge provider. It updates the ProviderInfo and CustomerResponse schemas, implements a helper function futureKYCLink to filter and retrieve the earliest future requirement within a 30-day window, and adds comprehensive test coverage. Feedback suggests refactoring the futureKYCLink function to return a consistent Promise by declaring it async, replacing toSorted with sort for better compatibility, and using async/await with try/catch for improved readability.

Important

The consumer version of Gemini Code Assist on GitHub is being sunset. Starting June 18, 2026, new organization installations will be blocked, and all code review activity will officially cease on July 17, 2026.
For more details on the timeline and next steps, please review the Help Documentation.

coderabbitai · 2026-06-04T13:51:20Z

Note

Reviews paused

It looks like this branch is under active development. To avoid overwhelming you with review comments due to an influx of new commits, CodeRabbit has automatically paused this review. You can configure this behavior by changing the reviews.auto_review.auto_pause_after_reviewed_commits setting.

Use the following commands to manage reviews:

@coderabbitai resume to resume automatic reviews.
@coderabbitai review to trigger a single review.

Use the checkboxes below for quick actions:

▶️ Resume reviews
🔍 Trigger review

Walkthrough

Adds an optional futureRequirement to Bridge provider responses, parses Bridge future requirements, selects the earliest eligible future item within a 30-day window, wires it into getProvider(), and updates tests and release notes.

Changes

Bridge future requirement response

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Response and customer schemas `server/api/ramp.ts`, `server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts`	Adds optional `futureRequirement` to the Bridge provider response schema and extends Bridge customer parsing for `endorsements[].future_requirements` entries with `effective_date` and `pending`.
Future requirement selection `server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts`	Adds the helper that flattens future requirements, filters eligible entries by pending state and date window, selects the earliest effective date, generates a KYC link, and wires the result into the active `getProvider()` path.
Provider behavior tests `server/test/utils/bridge.test.ts`	Updates ACTIVE provider expectations for missing future requirements and adds cases for eligible selection, exclusion rules, invalid dates, failures, and multi-endorsement ordering.
Release note `.changeset/swift-otters-prepare.md`	Adds a changeset declaring a patch release for `@exactly/server` with the future requirement note.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 4 (Complex) | ⏱️ ~45 minutes

Possibly related PRs

exactly/exa#950: Also changes the Bridge provider response path and related schema/tests in server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts, server/api/ramp.ts, and server/test/utils/bridge.test.ts.
exactly/exa#1079: Also modifies Bridge getProvider() behavior and the ACTIVE/ONBOARDING control flow in the same utility.
exactly/exa#814: Earlier Bridge provider type and link-field changes in the same area.

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.
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.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly matches the main change: adding a future requirement field to the Bridge server provider.

_{✏️ 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 eea

✨ Simplify code

Create PR with simplified code
Commit simplified code in branch eea

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.}

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 7ef72285cd

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".

coderabbitai

Actionable comments posted: 2

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: c3e6cdfd-6eac-4198-88d8-b9cb4d4a7451

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5c3f91c and 7ef7228.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)

.changeset/swift-otters-prepare.md
server/api/ramp.ts
server/test/utils/bridge.test.ts
server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts

coderabbitai

♻️ Duplicate comments (1)

server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts (1)

1063-1068: ⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 Major | ⚡ Quick win

Exclude past-due requirements from the future window filter.

Line 1066 only enforces the upper bound, so already-expired effective_date values (negative delta) are still eligible and can produce futureKYCLink incorrectly.

proposed fix

 function futureKYCLink(bridgeUser: InferOutput<typeof CustomerResponse>, redirectUri?: string) {
+  const now = Date.now();
   const next = bridgeUser.endorsements
     .flatMap((endorsement) => endorsement.future_requirements ?? [])
     .filter(
-      (requirement) =>
-        requirement.pending.length === 0 &&
-        new Date(requirement.effective_date).getTime() - Date.now() <= FutureKYCWindowMs,
+      (requirement) => {
+        const delta = new Date(requirement.effective_date).getTime() - now;
+        return requirement.pending.length === 0 && delta >= 0 && delta <= FutureKYCWindowMs;
+      },
     )
     .toSorted((a, b) => new Date(a.effective_date).getTime() - new Date(b.effective_date).getTime())[0];

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 4bc3a048-7ed4-4302-850b-99d02d6f0fa9

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 406ecf2 and 74e0362.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)

.changeset/swift-otters-prepare.md
server/api/ramp.ts
server/test/utils/bridge.test.ts
server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 74e036270c

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".

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: b75da58303

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".

mainqueg requested review from cruzdanilo and nfmelendez as code owners June 4, 2026 13:48

gemini-code-assist Bot reviewed Jun 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts Outdated

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jun 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts Outdated

coderabbitai Bot reviewed Jun 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread server/test/utils/bridge.test.ts Outdated

Comment thread server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts Outdated

mainqueg force-pushed the eea branch 2 times, most recently from 406ecf2 to 74e0362 Compare June 12, 2026 15:38

coderabbitai Bot reviewed Jun 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jun 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts

mainqueg force-pushed the eea branch from 74e0362 to b75da58 Compare June 12, 2026 19:25

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jun 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts Outdated

Comment thread server/utils/ramps/bridge.ts

cruzdanilo force-pushed the main branch from 73b8aa4 to e59c92c Compare June 12, 2026 19:32

cruzdanilo requested a review from itofarina as a code owner June 12, 2026 19:32

cruzdanilo force-pushed the eea branch from b75da58 to bd9903b Compare June 12, 2026 19:32

cruzdanilo linked an issue Jun 22, 2026 that may be closed by this pull request

server: european kyc requirements #1108

Closed

mainqueg force-pushed the eea branch from bd9903b to 3bf3f66 Compare June 23, 2026 17:47

mainqueg changed the title ~~✨ server: add future kyc link to bridge provider~~ ✨ server: add future requirement to bridge provider Jun 23, 2026

mainqueg force-pushed the eea branch 2 times, most recently from 3a44227 to 8f9a962 Compare June 24, 2026 13:05

mainqueg changed the title ~~✨ server: add future requirement to bridge provider~~ ✨ server: add future requirement to bridge Jun 24, 2026

✨ server: add future requirement to bridge

149d39f

mainqueg force-pushed the eea branch from 8f9a962 to 149d39f Compare June 24, 2026 13:59

cruzdanilo merged commit 149d39f into main Jun 24, 2026
3 of 4 checks passed

cruzdanilo deleted the eea branch June 24, 2026 14:05

cruzdanilo temporarily deployed to version June 24, 2026 14:05 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

cruzdanilo mentioned this pull request Jun 24, 2026

🔖 release: common@0.0.15, docs@0.1.5, mobile@1.2.13, server@0.2.99 #1085

Merged

Uh oh!

Conversation

mainqueg commented Jun 4, 2026 • edited by coderabbitai Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary by CodeRabbit

Uh oh!

changeset-bot Bot commented Jun 4, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🦋 Changeset detected

Uh oh!

sentry Bot commented Jun 4, 2026 • edited by codecov Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

❌ 1 Tests Failed:

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Code Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented Jun 4, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviews paused

Walkthrough

Changes

Estimated code review effort

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

mainqueg commented Jun 4, 2026 •

edited by coderabbitai Bot

Loading

changeset-bot Bot commented Jun 4, 2026 •

edited

Loading

sentry Bot commented Jun 4, 2026 •

edited by codecov Bot

Loading

coderabbitai Bot commented Jun 4, 2026 •

edited

Loading