Fix the bulk approve partner #2877
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
WalkthroughConsolidates partner group handling by removing default fallbacks in UI display and enforcing unconditional group-based updates in bulk approval. The UI now shows "-" when no valid group is found, and the backend always resolves a group via groupId or program.defaultGroupId before updating enrollments. Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
autonumber
actor Admin
participant UI as Dashboard UI
participant Action as bulk-approve-partners
participant DB as DB
Admin->>UI: Approve selected partners
UI->>Action: POST partners + optional groupId
Action->>DB: Fetch program (includes defaultGroupId)
Action->>DB: Fetch group (groupId ?? defaultGroupId)
alt Group found
Action->>DB: Update enrollments with groupId and reward/discount fields
else Group missing
Action->>DB: (Same path) Update fails or no-op per DB constraints
end
Action->>DB: Persist logs/workflows using updatedEnrollments
Action-->>UI: Result (success/error)
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests
Warning Review ran into problems🔥 ProblemsGit: Failed to clone repository. Please run the 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. Comment |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
apps/web/app/app.dub.co/(dashboard)/[slug]/(ee)/program/partners/applications/page-client.tsx (1)
219-230: Micro-optimization: avoid O(n) lookup per row with a Map.Build a
groupByIdMap once and use O(1) lookups in the cell.Apply this diff in the cell:
- if (!groups || !row.original.groupId) { - return "-"; - } - - const partnerGroup = groups.find( - (g) => g.id === row.original.groupId, - ); - - if (!partnerGroup) { - return "-"; - } + const partnerGroup = groupById?.get(row.original.groupId!); + if (!partnerGroup) return "-";And add this near your other hooks (outside this block):
const groupById = useMemo( () => (groups ? new Map(groups.map((g) => [g.id, g])) : undefined), [groups], );apps/web/lib/actions/partners/bulk-approve-partners.ts (1)
43-58: Don’t overwrite createdAt during approval.Updating
createdAton approval corrupts original creation timestamps. Remove it; rely onupdatedAt(if present) or an explicitapprovedAtfield instead.Apply this diff:
data: { status: "approved", - createdAt: new Date(), groupId: group.id, clickRewardId: group.clickRewardId, leadRewardId: group.leadRewardId, saleRewardId: group.saleRewardId, discountId: group.discountId, },
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
apps/web/app/app.dub.co/(dashboard)/[slug]/(ee)/program/partners/applications/page-client.tsx(1 hunks)apps/web/lib/actions/partners/bulk-approve-partners.ts(2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧠 Learnings (1)
📓 Common learnings
Learnt from: devkiran
PR: dubinc/dub#2735
File: apps/web/lib/actions/partners/update-discount.ts:60-66
Timestamp: 2025-08-14T05:57:35.546Z
Learning: In the partner groups system, discounts should always belong to a group. The partnerGroup relation should never be null when updating discounts, so optional chaining on partnerGroup?.id may be unnecessary defensive programming.
🔇 Additional comments (1)
apps/web/app/app.dub.co/(dashboard)/[slug]/(ee)/program/partners/applications/page-client.tsx (1)
220-230: LGTM: explicit “no group” fallback is correct.Returning "-" when
groupsis unset or thegroupIdlookup fails removes the hidden default and aligns with backend guarantees.
| const group = await getGroupOrThrow({ | ||
| programId: program.id, | ||
| groupId: groupId ?? program.defaultGroupId, | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Gracefully handle missing group: throw a clear, user-facing error before fetching.
If neither groupId nor program.defaultGroupId is set, getGroupOrThrow will throw, likely as a generic 500. Guard and surface a clear message.
Apply this diff:
- const group = await getGroupOrThrow({
- programId: program.id,
- groupId: groupId ?? program.defaultGroupId,
- });
+ const effectiveGroupId = groupId ?? program.defaultGroupId;
+ if (!effectiveGroupId) {
+ throw new Error(
+ "No group selected and no default group configured for this program.",
+ );
+ }
+ const group = await getGroupOrThrow({
+ programId: program.id,
+ groupId: effectiveGroupId,
+ });📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| const group = await getGroupOrThrow({ | |
| programId: program.id, | |
| groupId: groupId ?? program.defaultGroupId, | |
| }); | |
| const effectiveGroupId = groupId ?? program.defaultGroupId; | |
| if (!effectiveGroupId) { | |
| throw new Error( | |
| "No group selected and no default group configured for this program.", | |
| ); | |
| } | |
| const group = await getGroupOrThrow({ | |
| programId: program.id, | |
| groupId: effectiveGroupId, | |
| }); |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In apps/web/lib/actions/partners/bulk-approve-partners.ts around lines 38 to 41,
guard against both groupId and program.defaultGroupId being undefined before
calling getGroupOrThrow: if neither value exists, throw a clear, user-facing
error (e.g., a Validation/BadRequest error with a message like "No group
specified for this program; please provide groupId or set a defaultGroupId") so
the caller receives a 4xx with a helpful message instead of an uncaught 500;
otherwise continue to call getGroupOrThrow with the chosen id.
Summary by CodeRabbit