Skip to content

refactor: split update project request#486

Merged
rohilsurana merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
refactor/split-update-project-request
May 12, 2026
Merged

refactor: split update project request#486
rohilsurana merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
refactor/split-update-project-request

Conversation

@AmanGIT07
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@AmanGIT07 AmanGIT07 commented May 12, 2026

No description provided.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown

github-actions Bot commented May 12, 2026 •
edited
Loading

The latest Buf updates on your PR. Results from workflow Validate / validate (pull_request).

BuildFormatLintBreakingUpdated (UTC)
✅ passed⏩ skipped✅ passed❌ failed (1)May 12, 2026, 7:33 AM

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai Bot commented May 12, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Review Change Stack

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This pull request introduces a new UpdateProjectRequestBody message in the Frontier protobuf schema to replace the generic ProjectRequestBody for update operations. The new message explicitly defines the three updatable project fields: name, title, and metadata, removing the org_id field that was present in the original ProjectRequestBody. The UpdateProjectRequest message's body field is updated to reference this new, more specific message type, providing a clearer contract for project update operations.

Suggested reviewers

  • whoAbhishekSah
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)

Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Description check ❓ Inconclusive No pull request description was provided by the author, making it impossible to assess whether the description is related to the changeset. Add a pull request description explaining the rationale for splitting the request body and any backward compatibility considerations.
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Title check ✅ Passed The title 'refactor: split update project request' directly reflects the main change: splitting UpdateProjectRequest to use a dedicated UpdateProjectRequestBody instead of the generic ProjectRequestBody.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
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.

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.

coderabbitai[bot]
coderabbitai Bot reviewed May 12, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@coderabbitai coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents 
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

Inline comments:
In `@raystack/frontier/v1beta1/frontier.proto`:
- Around line 1851-1864: The proto breaks compatibility by changing field number
2 in UpdateProjectRequest from ProjectRequestBody to UpdateProjectRequestBody;
revert the type of field 2 back to the original ProjectRequestBody and instead
add a new field (e.g., UpdateProjectRequest.update_body) with a fresh tag number
for UpdateProjectRequestBody, leaving UpdateProjectRequestBody message intact;
update server-side handler to accept both fields (prefer the new update_body
when present) and keep validation accordingly so the migrated schema remains
backward-compatible; reference UpdateProjectRequest, UpdateProjectRequestBody,
ProjectRequestBody and the existing field tag 2 when making the change.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

  • Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
  • Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: cbd53c13-d302-4132-8d24-477cedca8205

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 380a382 and 8a526be.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • raystack/frontier/v1beta1/frontier.proto

Comment thread raystack/frontier/v1beta1/frontier.proto
@rohilsurana rohilsurana merged commit 859ba76 into main May 12, 2026
2 of 3 checks passed
@rohilsurana rohilsurana deleted the refactor/split-update-project-request branch May 12, 2026 08:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@coderabbitai coderabbitai[bot] coderabbitai[bot] left review comments

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@AmanGIT07 @rohilsurana