Skip to content

Conversation

@kevinansfield
Copy link
Member

@kevinansfield kevinansfield commented Mar 10, 2025

ref https://linear.app/ghost/issue/ONC-801/

Early iterations of convent visibility used a visibility format that our format conversion did not support. This could result in HTML cards created from these early iterations not rendering in emails.

  • changed visibility util functions to always return new objects rather than modify by ref
  • renamed usesOldVisibilityFormat to isOldVisibilityFormat to better represent fn intent
  • updated isOldVisibilityFormat to handle missing web/email.memberSegment properties in case there have been previous incorrect migrations
  • extracted "is visibility active" logic to new isVisibilityRestricted util function and expanded to cover all old formats
  • updated migrateOldVisibilityFormat to handle the older {emailOnly} format and to correctly migrate the incorrect NQL filters used in older formats
  • expanded tests to cover all old formats and NQL filters
  • added test to kg-lexical-html-renderer to assert HTML card does now get rendered in email when using the old visibility format
  • added yarn test:no-coverage to kg-default-nodes to get cleaner test output when desired during development

@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 10, 2025

Walkthrough

The changes update how node visibility is handled across multiple modules. Modifications in the generate-decorator-node.js file simplify the import and assessment of node visibility by removing redundant checks and consolidating migration logic. The utility functions in the visibility.js module have been refactored, with new constants for member segments added and functions renamed for consistency. The migration function now deep clones and adjusts legacy visibility formats more robustly, while a new function, isVisibilityRestricted, determines if visibility restrictions apply. Test cases have been expanded to cover various legacy and new visibility scenarios, including HTML card rendering for emails. Additionally, a new script was added to the package configuration to facilitate testing without coverage verification.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • ronaldlangeveld

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5f0febc and a3f6f61.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • packages/kg-lexical-html-renderer/test/cards.test.js (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • packages/kg-lexical-html-renderer/test/cards.test.js

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
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

ronaldlangeveld and others added 3 commits March 11, 2025 14:52
- Exteneded tests for '', 'status:free', 'status:paid', and 'status:-free+status:-paid' to cover all bases.
- Checked `showOnEmail` and `emailOnly` combos to make sure visibility migration works solid.
- changed util functions to always return new objects rather than modify by ref
- renamed `usesOldVisibilityFormat` to `isOldVisibilityFormat` to better represent fn intent
- updated `isOldVisibilityFormat` to handle missing `web/email.memberSegment` properties in case there have been previous incorrect migrations
- extracted "is visibility active" logic to new `isVisibilityRestricted` util function and expanded to cover all old formats
- updated `migrateOldVisibilityFormat` to handle the older `{emailOnly}` format and to correctly migrate the incorrect NQL filters used in older formats
- expanded tests to cover all old formats and NQL filters
- added `yarn test:no-coverage` to `kg-default-nodes` to get cleaner test output when desired during development
@kevinansfield kevinansfield marked this pull request as ready for review March 12, 2025 12:04
@kevinansfield kevinansfield merged commit 6ccedee into main Mar 12, 2025
3 checks passed
@kevinansfield kevinansfield deleted the fix-visibility-transform-for-old-format branch March 12, 2025 12:16
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