Discord Bot - Source updates #14472
Discord Bot - Source updates #14472
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎ 3 Skipped Deployments
|
WalkthroughThe pull request includes updates to the Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 5
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (5)
components/discord_bot/sources/new-tag-added-to-thread/test-event.mjs (1)
24-46: Consider using more realistic test data for tags.While the tag structure is correct, consider using more meaningful tag names instead of "tag", "tag2", "tag3" to better represent real-world usage. This would make the test event more valuable for testing and documentation purposes.
Example improvement:
{ "id": "1301256232052457563", - "name": "tag", + "name": "bug-report", "moderated": false, "emoji_id": null, - "emoji_name": null, + "emoji_name": "🐛", },components/discord_bot/sources/new-forum-thread-message/test-event.mjs (1)
55-71: Consider enhancing tag test coverageWhile the applied_tags structure is correct, consider enhancing the test data to include:
- A tag with an emoji (non-null emoji_id and emoji_name)
- A moderated tag (moderated: true)
This would provide better coverage for different tag configurations.
"applied_tags": [ { "id": "1301256232052457563", "name": "tag", "moderated": false, "emoji_id": null, "emoji_name": null, }, { "id": "1301281978968178759", - "name": "tag2", - "moderated": false, - "emoji_id": null, - "emoji_name": null, + "name": "urgent", + "moderated": true, + "emoji_id": "123456789", + "emoji_name": "🚨", }, ],components/discord_bot/sources/new-tag-added-to-thread/new-tag-added-to-thread.mjs (2)
1-22: LGTM! Consider documenting version requirements.The component structure and configuration are well-defined. The imports, metadata, and props follow platform conventions.
Consider adding a comment documenting the minimum Discord API version required for the forum thread features.
7-11: Add usage documentation and examples.While the implementation aligns with the PR objectives, consider adding:
- JSDoc comments describing the component's functionality
- Example usage scenarios in the description
- Documentation about the emitted event structure
Would you like me to provide a template for the documentation?
components/discord_bot/sources/new-forum-thread-message/new-forum-thread-message.mjs (1)
123-131: Optimize forum tags processing and add validation.The current implementation makes an additional API call to fetch forum tags and doesn't handle potential missing data gracefully.
Consider this improved implementation:
- const { available_tags: availableTags = [] } = await this.getChannel(this.forumId); + // Fetch forum data once outside the loop + let availableTags = []; + try { + const forumData = await this.getChannel(this.forumId); + availableTags = forumData.available_tags || []; + } catch (error) { + console.error(`Failed to fetch forum tags: ${error.message}`); + availableTags = []; + } + for (const message of messages) { - if (!message.thread.applied_tags) { - message.thread.applied_tags = []; - } - message.thread.applied_tags = message.thread.applied_tags.map((tagId) => ({ - ...availableTags.find(({ id }) => id === tagId), - })); + // Ensure thread and applied_tags exist + if (!message.thread) continue; + + const appliedTags = message.thread.applied_tags || []; + message.thread.applied_tags = appliedTags + .map((tagId) => availableTags.find(({ id }) => id === tagId)) + .filter(Boolean); // Remove any undefined tags }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
pnpm-lock.yamlis excluded by!**/pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
components/discord_bot/package.json(2 hunks)components/discord_bot/sources/new-forum-thread-message/new-forum-thread-message.mjs(3 hunks)components/discord_bot/sources/new-forum-thread-message/test-event.mjs(1 hunks)components/discord_bot/sources/new-tag-added-to-thread/new-tag-added-to-thread.mjs(1 hunks)components/discord_bot/sources/new-tag-added-to-thread/test-event.mjs(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (11)
components/discord_bot/package.json (2)
13-13: Verify compatibility with @pipedream/platform v3.
The major version jump from ^1.6.0 to ^3.0.3 suggests breaking changes. Please ensure:
- All breaking changes from v2 and v3 have been addressed
- The new thread-related features are compatible with v3
Let's check for platform-dependent code that might need updates:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for platform imports and usage
rg -l "@pipedream/platform" --type js --type mjs3-3: Version bump looks appropriate.
The increment to 0.6.0 aligns with semver for the new thread-related features being added.
Let's verify the changelog is updated:
✅ Verification successful
Version bump from 0.5.5 to 0.6.0 is appropriate for the new thread-related features
The version bump from 0.5.5 to 0.6.0 is justified by:
- Addition of new forum thread-related functionality (send-message-to-forum-post action)
- Following semantic versioning where minor version increases (0.5.x to 0.6.0) indicate new features
- Recent commits show consistent development of forum-related features
While a changelog was not found, the git history provides clear evidence of the feature additions that warrant this version increment.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if changelog exists and contains version update
fd -g CHANGELOG.md -x grep -l "0.6.0" {} \;
Length of output: 170
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try different approaches to find changelog information
# 1. Look for any changelog files (case-insensitive)
fd -i changelog
# 2. Look for version information in package.json directory
ls -la components/discord_bot/
# 3. Search for version bump mentions in recent commits
git log -n 10 --grep="0.6.0"
# 4. Check if there are any markdown files in the discord_bot component that might contain changelog
fd -e md components/discord_bot/
Length of output: 32361
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the git history for version bump related changes and README for changelog info
# 1. Check recent commits for the discord bot changes
git log -n 5 --oneline -- components/discord_bot/
# 2. Check README.md content
cat components/discord_bot/README.md
# 3. Look for any changelog sections in the README
grep -A 10 "changelog\|CHANGELOG\|Changes\|CHANGES" components/discord_bot/README.md
Length of output: 285
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the recent commits in more detail and check for changes
# 1. Look at the commit that mentions forum post
git show ceb79a1b0dcf --name-status
# 2. Check the actual changes in package.json
git show ceb79a1b0dcf -- components/discord_bot/package.json
# 3. Check the commit message details
git show ceb79a1b0dcf --pretty=full
Length of output: 5836
components/discord_bot/sources/new-tag-added-to-thread/test-event.mjs (3)
14-20: LGTM! Thread metadata structure is correct.
The thread metadata follows Discord's API specification with proper timestamp formats and valid archive duration.
21-23: Verify message count consistency.
The current values show:
message_count: 0member_count: 1total_message_sent: 0
Please verify if these values accurately represent the initial state of a new thread. Typically, when a thread is created, it should have at least one message (the initial post).
1-13: Verify Discord thread type value.
Please verify that type: 11 is the correct value for Discord thread channels. According to Discord's API documentation, channel types are enumerated values, and we should ensure this matches Discord's specification.
✅ Verification successful
Let me search specifically for Discord thread-related constants and documentation in the codebase.
Let me search specifically for Discord thread channel type definitions in the codebase.
Let me try one final search with different flags to find Discord channel type information.
Let me check the constants file to verify the channel type definition.
The channel type value is correct according to Discord's API documentation.
Based on the constants file, type 11 corresponds to GUILD_PUBLIC_THREAD in Discord's channel types. The test event correctly uses this value for a thread channel. This is confirmed by:
- The
CHANNEL_TYPESconstant in constants.mjs which mapsGUILD_PUBLIC_THREAD: 11 - The documentation link referenced in the code comments pointing to Discord's official API documentation
- The consistent usage across other thread-related test events in the codebase
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for Discord channel type definitions or usage in the codebase
rg -A 5 "channel.*type.*11|THREAD.*=.*11"
Length of output: 1146
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for Discord thread or channel type definitions
rg -i "thread.*type|channel.*type" -A 3 --type js --type mjs
# Also check if there are any similar test events
fd "test-event" --exec grep -A 5 "type.*:" {}
Length of output: 114585
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for Discord thread channel type definitions in the source code
rg -i "thread.*type.*=.*11|THREAD_.*=.*11|ChannelType.*=.*11" --type js --type ts --type mjs
# Also check for any Discord API or channel type documentation
fd -e md -e txt . | xargs grep -l -i "discord.*channel.*type" 2>/dev/null
Length of output: 186
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any channel type definitions or usage in Discord bot code
rg -l "type.*:.*11|channelType.*11|CHANNEL_TYPES" components/discord_bot/
# Also check for any test events with channel types
rg "type.*:" components/discord_bot/sources/*/test-event.mjs
Length of output: 1384
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the Discord channel type definitions in constants file
cat components/discord_bot/common/constants.mjs
Length of output: 2175
components/discord_bot/sources/new-forum-thread-message/test-event.mjs (4)
31-32: LGTM: Thread property addition aligns with requirements
The addition of the thread property to the test event correctly implements the requirement to include the Channel Object in the Message Object.
45-51: LGTM: Thread metadata is well-structured
The thread metadata includes all required fields with properly formatted ISO 8601 timestamps. The archive duration of 4320 minutes (3 days) is a valid value for forum threads.
52-54: LGTM: Thread statistics reflect initial state
The message count, member count, and total message sent values correctly represent a newly created forum thread.
33-44: Verify thread properties match Discord's API specification
The thread properties appear to be correctly structured. Let's verify the channel type and required fields match Discord's API specification.
✅ Verification successful
The previous search revealed the existence of channel type constants, but we need to see their actual values to verify if type 11 matches GUILD_PUBLIC_THREAD. Let's examine the constants file directly.
Thread properties correctly match Discord's API specification
The channel type 11 in the test event exactly matches Discord's official channel type for GUILD_PUBLIC_THREAD as defined in the constants file. The other properties like id, name, parent_id, and flags are also standard Discord thread channel fields. The test event structure is valid and properly formatted.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify channel type and required fields match Discord's documentation
# Expected: Find references to channel type 11 (public thread) in the codebase
# Search for channel type definitions or constants
rg -A 2 "CHANNEL_TYPES|ChannelType"
# Search for other forum thread implementations to verify consistency
rg -A 5 "type:\s*11|type: GUILD_PUBLIC_THREAD"
Length of output: 7956
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the Discord bot constants file for channel type definitions
cat components/discord_bot/common/constants.mjs
Length of output: 2175
components/discord_bot/sources/new-forum-thread-message/new-forum-thread-message.mjs (2)
11-11: LGTM! Component metadata updates are appropriate.
The description update and version bump align well with the feature additions.
Also applies to: 13-13
118-131: Verify thread property implementation meets requirements.
The implementation now includes the thread property with Channel Object and applied_tags as required. However, let's verify the structure matches Discord's API specifications.
components/discord_bot/sources/new-tag-added-to-thread/new-tag-added-to-thread.mjs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
components/discord_bot/sources/new-tag-added-to-thread/new-tag-added-to-thread.mjs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
components/discord_bot/sources/new-tag-added-to-thread/new-tag-added-to-thread.mjs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
components/discord_bot/sources/new-forum-thread-message/new-forum-thread-message.mjs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
components/discord_bot/sources/new-forum-thread-message/new-forum-thread-message.mjs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
/approve |
Resolves #14468
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
New Forum Thread Messagecomponent for improved clarity and functionality.Version Updates
Documentation