fix: location label mismatch in round robin rescheduled bookings #25144
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR do?
Fixes a UI bug where rescheduled round robin bookings display an incorrect video provider label on the booking success page. When a round robin event is rescheduled and the new host lacks the original video provider credentials (e.g., Google Meet), the system correctly falls back to Cal Video for the actual meeting link, but the UI was still showing the original provider name.
Root Cause: The provider label (
providerNameandrescheduleProviderName) was derived frombooking.location(which stores the original location selection) instead of from the actual video call URL being used (booking.metadata.videoCallUrl).The Fix: Updated the booking success page to derive provider names from the effective location with proper fallback chain:
providerName: UsesvideoCallUrl ?? locationrescheduleProviderName: UsesvideoCallUrl ?? rescheduleLocation ?? locationThis ensures the displayed label matches the actual meeting link being used.
Link to Devin run: https://app.devin.ai/sessions/fd6c8502fffa4b469af5fd0bfab61263
Requested by: [email protected] (@joeauyeung)
Mandatory Tasks (DO NOT REMOVE)
How should this be tested?
Scenario to reproduce the original issue:
Environment variables: None required beyond standard Cal.com setup
Test data needed:
Expected behavior:
Important Review Points
Fallback logic correctness: Verify that
videoCallUrl ?? rescheduleLocation ?? locationmakes sense for all reschedule scenarios. Does this handle cases where:guessEventLocationTypecompatibility: This function needs to correctly identify provider names from video call URLs. Reviewers should verify it handles:https://cal.com/video/...)https://meet.google.com/...)Edge cases: Consider scenarios like:
No test coverage: This PR doesn't include automated tests. Consider whether a regression test should be added before merging.
Checklist