Skip to content

Add support for new envelope types #702

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 1 commit into
base: 04-04-generate_report_ids
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

neekolas
Copy link
Contributor

@neekolas neekolas commented Apr 4, 2025

TL;DR

Added support for payer reports and payer report attestations in the envelope system.

What changed?

  • Added two new topic kinds: TOPIC_KIND_PAYER_REPORTS_V1 and TOPIC_KIND_PAYER_REPORT_ATTESTATIONS_V1 to the topic package
  • Extended the TopicMatchesPayload() function to handle the new payload types: PayerReport and PayerReportAttestation
  • Added a test case for payer report envelopes with mismatched topics

How to test?

  1. Run the existing test suite to verify that the new topic kinds and payload types are properly handled:
    go test ./pkg/envelopes/...
    go test ./pkg/topic/...
    
  2. Create client envelopes with payer report payloads and verify they match with the correct topic kinds.

Why make this change?

This change extends the envelope system to support payer reports and their attestations, which are needed for payment verification and reporting functionality. The envelope system needs to properly match these new payload types with their corresponding topics to ensure messages are routed correctly.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Expanded message processing to support additional report and attestation types, enhancing how diverse data is managed.
    • Improved topic categorization to align with these new data types.
  • Tests

    • Added a scenario to verify that the system correctly handles cases where the data type does not match the expected topic.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Apr 4, 2025

Walkthrough

The pull request extends the envelope handling functionality by modifying the TopicMatchesPayload method in the client envelope to support two new payload types: PayerReport and PayerReportAttestation. Corresponding topic constants and string representations are added in the topic package. A new test case is introduced to verify that a mismatch between an envelope payload and an incorrect topic is properly identified without error.

Changes

File(s) Summary
pkg/envelopes/client.go
pkg/envelopes/envelopes_test.go
Extended TopicMatchesPayload to support PayerReport and PayerReportAttestation payload types and added a test case for handling a topic mismatch with a PayerReport payload.
pkg/topic/topic.go Added two new topic constants (TOPIC_KIND_PAYER_REPORTS_V1 and TOPIC_KIND_PAYER_REPORT_ATTESTATIONS_V1) and updated the String() method to include their string representations.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant CE as ClientEnvelope
    participant P as Payload
    participant T as TopicKind

    CE->>+CE: Invoke TopicMatchesPayload(P, targetTopic)
    alt P is PayerReport
        CE->>CE: Check targetTopic == TOPIC_KIND_PAYER_REPORTS_V1
    else P is PayerReportAttestation
        CE->>CE: Check targetTopic == TOPIC_KIND_PAYER_REPORT_ATTESTATIONS_V1
    else
        CE->>CE: Handle other payload types
    end
    CE-->>-CE: Return match result (true/false)
Loading

Possibly related PRs

  • Add tests and fix bugs for payer API #248: Contains enhancements to the PublishClientEnvelopes method and introduces tests for the PayerApiService, sharing functionality related to handling PayerReport payloads and topic associations.

Suggested reviewers

  • richardhuaaa
  • mkysel

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.

🔧 golangci-lint (1.64.8)

Error: you are using a configuration file for golangci-lint v2 with golangci-lint v1: please use golangci-lint v2
Failed executing command with error: you are using a configuration file for golangci-lint v2 with golangci-lint v1: please use golangci-lint v2

Tip

⚡💬 Agentic Chat (Pro Plan, General Availability)
  • We're introducing multi-step agentic chat in review comments and issue comments, within and outside of PR's. This feature enhances review and issue discussions with the CodeRabbit agentic chat by enabling advanced interactions, including the ability to create pull requests directly from comments and add commits to existing pull requests.

📜 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 7d1bea7 and 79ffefb.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • pkg/envelopes/client.go (1 hunks)
  • pkg/envelopes/envelopes_test.go (1 hunks)
  • pkg/topic/topic.go (2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
  • pkg/envelopes/envelopes_test.go
  • pkg/topic/topic.go
  • pkg/envelopes/client.go
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (8)
  • GitHub Check: Push Docker Images to GitHub Packages (xmtpd-cli)
  • GitHub Check: Push Docker Images to GitHub Packages (xmtpd-cli)
  • GitHub Check: Push Docker Images to GitHub Packages (xmtpd)
  • GitHub Check: Test (Node)
  • GitHub Check: Upgrade Tests
  • GitHub Check: Push Docker Images to GitHub Packages (xmtpd)
  • GitHub Check: Test (Node)
  • GitHub Check: Upgrade Tests

🪧 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.

@neekolas neekolas mentioned this pull request Apr 4, 2025
Copy link
Contributor Author

neekolas commented Apr 4, 2025

Warning

This pull request is not mergeable via GitHub because a downstack PR is open. Once all requirements are satisfied, merge this PR as a stack on Graphite.
Learn more

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

This was referenced Apr 4, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@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: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
pkg/envelopes/envelopes_test.go (1)

138-144: Add positive test cases for new envelope types.

While the negative test case for PayerReport is good, consider adding:

  1. A positive test case for PayerReport with the correct topic kind
  2. Both positive and negative test cases for PayerReportAttestation

This would ensure comprehensive test coverage for both new payload types.

 	// Payer Report envelope with wrong topic
 	clientEnvelope, err = NewClientEnvelope(&envelopesProto.ClientEnvelope{
 		Payload: &envelopesProto.ClientEnvelope_PayerReport{},
 		Aad:     buildAad(topic.NewTopic(topic.TOPIC_KIND_GROUP_MESSAGES_V1, []byte{1, 2, 3})),
 	})
 	require.NoError(t, err)
 	require.False(t, clientEnvelope.TopicMatchesPayload())
+
+	// Payer Report envelope with correct topic
+	clientEnvelope, err = NewClientEnvelope(&envelopesProto.ClientEnvelope{
+		Payload: &envelopesProto.ClientEnvelope_PayerReport{},
+		Aad:     buildAad(topic.NewTopic(topic.TOPIC_KIND_PAYER_REPORTS_V1, []byte{1, 2, 3})),
+	})
+	require.NoError(t, err)
+	require.True(t, clientEnvelope.TopicMatchesPayload())
+
+	// Payer Report Attestation envelope with wrong topic
+	clientEnvelope, err = NewClientEnvelope(&envelopesProto.ClientEnvelope{
+		Payload: &envelopesProto.ClientEnvelope_PayerReportAttestation{},
+		Aad:     buildAad(topic.NewTopic(topic.TOPIC_KIND_GROUP_MESSAGES_V1, []byte{1, 2, 3})),
+	})
+	require.NoError(t, err)
+	require.False(t, clientEnvelope.TopicMatchesPayload())
+
+	// Payer Report Attestation envelope with correct topic
+	clientEnvelope, err = NewClientEnvelope(&envelopesProto.ClientEnvelope{
+		Payload: &envelopesProto.ClientEnvelope_PayerReportAttestation{},
+		Aad:     buildAad(topic.NewTopic(topic.TOPIC_KIND_PAYER_REPORT_ATTESTATIONS_V1, []byte{1, 2, 3})),
+	})
+	require.NoError(t, err)
+	require.True(t, clientEnvelope.TopicMatchesPayload())
📜 Review details

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

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1599a16 and 7d1bea7.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • pkg/envelopes/client.go (1 hunks)
  • pkg/envelopes/envelopes_test.go (1 hunks)
  • pkg/topic/topic.go (2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧬 Code Definitions (2)
pkg/envelopes/client.go (1)
pkg/topic/topic.go (2)
  • TOPIC_KIND_PAYER_REPORTS_V1 (15-15)
  • TOPIC_KIND_PAYER_REPORT_ATTESTATIONS_V1 (16-16)
pkg/envelopes/envelopes_test.go (2)
pkg/envelopes/client.go (2)
  • NewClientEnvelope (17-36)
  • ClientEnvelope (12-15)
pkg/topic/topic.go (1)
  • NewTopic (43-48)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (6)
  • GitHub Check: Code Review
  • GitHub Check: Push Docker Images to GitHub Packages (xmtpd-cli)
  • GitHub Check: Push Docker Images to GitHub Packages (xmtpd)
  • GitHub Check: Upgrade Tests
  • GitHub Check: Test (Node)
  • GitHub Check: Build pre-baked anvil-xmtpd
🔇 Additional comments (3)
pkg/envelopes/client.go (1)

84-87: LGTM: New payload type support correctly implemented.

The implementation properly extends the TopicMatchesPayload method to handle the two new envelope types, maintaining consistency with the existing pattern by checking if the target topic kind matches the expected topic kind for each payload type.

pkg/topic/topic.go (2)

15-16: LGTM: New topic kinds added correctly.

The new constants follow the existing naming convention with the _V1 suffix and are added sequentially in the enumeration.


29-32: LGTM: String representations properly implemented.

The string representations for the new topic kinds use snake_case formatting consistent with existing topic kinds and provide clear descriptive names.

@neekolas neekolas force-pushed the 04-04-generate_report_ids branch from 1599a16 to b5f8759 Compare April 18, 2025 21:47
@neekolas neekolas force-pushed the 04-04-add_support_for_new_envelope_types branch from 7d1bea7 to 79ffefb Compare April 18, 2025 21:47
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.

1 participant