Skip to content

fix: Missing bookingId in BOOKING_CANCELLED webhook payload #22713

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Aug 1, 2025

Conversation

hariombalhara
Copy link
Member

@hariombalhara hariombalhara commented Jul 24, 2025

What does this PR do?

  • Fixes PRI-295

Now, we are sending bookingId from request-reschedule flow as well and building the payload at a central place that other places should use.

Tech Debt Cleanup

  • Created BookingWebhookFactory
    • Added tests for it

Mandatory Tasks (DO NOT REMOVE)

  • I have self-reviewed the code (A decent size PR without self-review might be rejected).
  • I have updated the developer docs in /docs if this PR makes changes that would require a documentation change. If N/A, write N/A here and check the checkbox.
  • I confirm automated tests are in place that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works.

How should this be tested?

Request Reschedule of a booking sends BOOKING_CANCELLED without bookingId in main branch

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jul 24, 2025

Walkthrough

A new TypeScript module, BookingWebhookFactory.ts, has been introduced to encapsulate the creation of webhook payloads for booking events, including cancellations. This module defines relevant types and a class with methods to build base and cancellation-specific payloads. Comprehensive unit tests for this factory were added in BookingWebhookFactory.test.ts, verifying payload construction across various scenarios. In the booking reschedule handler, the manual payload construction for cancellation webhooks was refactored to use the new factory, standardizing the payload structure and explicitly including fields such as bookingId, eventSlug, and cancelledBy. Additionally, a new JsonObject.d.ts type declaration file was added to define JSON-compatible types. No changes were made to exported or public entities in the handler.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes

  • Complexity label: Moderate
  • Rationale: The review involves understanding a new payload factory class, its type definitions, and comprehensive test coverage, as well as verifying a non-trivial refactor in the handler to ensure correct integration and field inclusion. The addition of JSON type declarations is straightforward. The changes are localized but require careful scrutiny to validate correctness and backward compatibility, especially regarding webhook payload structure.

Warning

There were issues while running some tools. Please review the errors and either fix the tool's configuration or disable the tool if it's a critical failure.

🔧 ESLint

If the error stems from missing dependencies, add them to the package.json file. For unrecoverable errors (e.g., due to private dependencies), disable the tool in the CodeRabbit configuration.

packages/lib/server/service/BookingWebhookFactory.ts

Oops! Something went wrong! :(

ESLint: 8.57.1

ESLint couldn't find the plugin "eslint-plugin-playwright".

(The package "eslint-plugin-playwright" was not found when loaded as a Node module from the directory "".)

It's likely that the plugin isn't installed correctly. Try reinstalling by running the following:

npm install eslint-plugin-playwright@latest --save-dev

The plugin "eslint-plugin-playwright" was referenced from the config file in ".eslintrc.js".

If you still can't figure out the problem, please stop by https://eslint.org/chat/help to chat with the team.

Note

⚡️ Unit Test Generation is now available in beta!

Learn more here, or try it out under "Finishing Touches" below.


📜 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 393668c and 5c080a7.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • packages/lib/server/service/BookingWebhookFactory.ts (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • packages/lib/server/service/BookingWebhookFactory.ts
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
  • GitHub Check: Install dependencies / Yarn install & cache
✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch fix-missing-bookingId-webhook

🪧 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.
    • Explain this complex logic.
    • 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 explain this code block.
    • @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 explain its main purpose.
    • @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.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

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 generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate unit tests to generate unit tests 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.

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jul 24, 2025

Hey there and thank you for opening this pull request! 👋🏼

We require pull request titles to follow the Conventional Commits specification and it looks like your proposed title needs to be adjusted.

Details:

No release type found in pull request title "send bookingId in BOOKING_CANCELLED through requestReschedule". Add a prefix to indicate what kind of release this pull request corresponds to. For reference, see https://www.conventionalcommits.org/

Available types:
 - feat: A new feature
 - fix: A bug fix
 - docs: Documentation only changes
 - style: Changes that do not affect the meaning of the code (white-space, formatting, missing semi-colons, etc)
 - refactor: A code change that neither fixes a bug nor adds a feature
 - perf: A code change that improves performance
 - test: Adding missing tests or correcting existing tests
 - build: Changes that affect the build system or external dependencies (example scopes: gulp, broccoli, npm)
 - ci: Changes to our CI configuration files and scripts (example scopes: Travis, Circle, BrowserStack, SauceLabs)
 - chore: Other changes that don't modify src or test files
 - revert: Reverts a previous commit

@keithwillcode keithwillcode added core area: core, team members only enterprise area: enterprise, audit log, organisation, SAML, SSO labels Jul 24, 2025
Copy link

linear bot commented Jul 24, 2025

PRI-295

@hariombalhara hariombalhara changed the title send bookingId in BOOKING_CANCELLED through requestReschedule fix: Missing bookingId in BOOKING_CANCELLED webhook payload Jul 24, 2025

const webhookFactory = new BookingWebhookFactory();
const payload = webhookFactory.createCancelledEventPayload({
bookingId: bookingToReschedule.id,
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Missing bookingId

Comment on lines +22 to +23
bookingId: number;
title: string;
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Made many properties required here

Comment on lines -298 to -300
destinationCalendar: bookingToReschedule?.destinationCalendar
? [bookingToReschedule?.destinationCalendar]
: [],
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This normalization of payload done in factory

@@ -276,39 +276,46 @@ export const requestRescheduleHandler = async ({ ctx, input }: RequestReschedule
eventType?.metadata as EventTypeMetadata
);

const evt: CalendarEvent = {
title: bookingToReschedule?.title,
type: event && event.slug ? event.slug : bookingToReschedule.title,
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This normalization is also taken care of by by the factory

@hariombalhara hariombalhara force-pushed the fix-missing-bookingId-webhook branch from 1ad74a9 to 3364c62 Compare July 24, 2025 12:04
Copy link

vercel bot commented Jul 24, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

2 Skipped Deployments
Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
cal ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Aug 1, 2025 5:45am
cal-eu ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Aug 1, 2025 5:45am

@hariombalhara hariombalhara marked this pull request as ready for review July 24, 2025 12:07
@graphite-app graphite-app bot requested a review from a team July 24, 2025 12:08
@dosubot dosubot bot added webhooks area: webhooks, callback, webhook payload 🐛 bug Something isn't working labels Jul 24, 2025
Copy link

graphite-app bot commented Jul 24, 2025

Graphite Automations

"Add consumer team as reviewer" took an action on this PR • (07/24/25)

1 reviewer was added to this PR based on Keith Williams's automation.

@hariombalhara hariombalhara force-pushed the fix-missing-bookingId-webhook branch from 05e781e to 378b5bc Compare July 25, 2025 04:08
Copy link
Contributor

@joeauyeung joeauyeung left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Awesome implementation of the factory and webhook contains bookingId

@hariombalhara hariombalhara enabled auto-merge (squash) August 1, 2025 05:46
@hariombalhara hariombalhara merged commit aa618db into main Aug 1, 2025
37 of 38 checks passed
@hariombalhara hariombalhara deleted the fix-missing-bookingId-webhook branch August 1, 2025 06:04
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Aug 1, 2025

E2E results are ready!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
🐛 bug Something isn't working core area: core, team members only enterprise area: enterprise, audit log, organisation, SAML, SSO ready-for-e2e webhooks area: webhooks, callback, webhook payload
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants