Skip to content

feat: booking audit log #22817

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

Draft
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

feat: booking audit log #22817

wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

alishaz-polymath
Copy link
Member

@alishaz-polymath alishaz-polymath commented Jul 30, 2025

What does this PR do?

Visual Demo (For contributors especially)

A visual demonstration is strongly recommended, for both the original and new change (video / image - any one).

Video Demo (if applicable):

  • Show screen recordings of the issue or feature.
  • Demonstrate how to reproduce the issue, the behavior before and after the change.

Image Demo (if applicable):

  • Add side-by-side screenshots of the original and updated change.
  • Highlight any significant change(s).

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?

  • Are there environment variables that should be set?
  • What are the minimal test data to have?
  • What is expected (happy path) to have (input and output)?
  • Any other important info that could help to test that PR

Checklist

  • I haven't read the contributing guide
  • My code doesn't follow the style guidelines of this project
  • I haven't commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I haven't checked if my changes generate no new warnings

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jul 30, 2025

Important

Review skipped

Draft detected.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch feat/booking-audit-log

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.
    • 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.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the ❗️ migrations contains migration files label Jul 30, 2025
@keithwillcode keithwillcode added core area: core, team members only enterprise area: enterprise, audit log, organisation, SAML, SSO labels Jul 30, 2025
Copy link

vercel bot commented Jul 30, 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 3:30am
cal-eu ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Aug 1, 2025 3:30am

Copy link

linear bot commented Jul 31, 2025

Comment on lines 6 to 33
export type BookingAuditData = {
version?: number;
actor?: {
type: "User" | "System" | "Attendee";
};
booking?: {
meetingTime?: string;
totalReschedules?: number;
attendeeCountChange?: number;
cancellationReason?: string;
rejectionReason?: string;
assignmentReason?: string;
reassignmentReason?: string;
};
attendee?: {
id?: string;
};
meeting?: {
provider?: string;
meetingId?: string;
meetingUrl?: string;
};
location?: {
type?: string;
address?: string;
details?: Record<string, unknown>;
};
};
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@emrysal Does this make sense as the structure? Anything I'm missing out on, or extra/unnecessary? Did you have the same vision about the versioning?

@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
import type { BookingAudit, Prisma } from "@prisma/client";

export interface IBookingAuditRepository {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The repository interface should be lightly decoupled from Prisma - use a DTO

e.g.

import type { BookingAuditCreateInput, BookingAudit } from "./dto/bookingAudit";

type BookingAuditCreateInput = Prisma.BookingAuditCreateInput;
...

})
.optional();

export type BookingAuditData = z.infer<typeof BookingAuditDataSchema>;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Try not to use z.infer if possible

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

z.infer seems like the idiomatic way to infer types from the zod schema. Is there a reason why we should avoid it? 👀

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's heavy on TS, but it is idiomatic.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What would be the recommended alternative?

data?: BookingAuditData | null;
};

const CURRENT_AUDIT_DATA_VERSION = 1;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Versioning should be done on the action, not on the entire table.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could you expand on this? I'm not sure I follow 🤔
Currently we version the data's structure to then be able to parse correctly in the future when any further changes comes in. Was that not the purpose/intention?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yes, but this is per payload type, not the entire table 👍

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
core area: core, team members only enterprise area: enterprise, audit log, organisation, SAML, SSO ❗️ migrations contains migration files
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Define and migrate BookingAudit table
3 participants