- 
                Notifications
    You must be signed in to change notification settings 
- Fork 9
fix: types issues #236
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
fix: types issues #236
Conversation
| Warning Rate limit exceeded@rodrigopavezi has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 17 minutes and 38 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the  We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. WalkthroughThis pull request includes updates to the changelogs and  Changes
 Possibly related PRs
 Suggested reviewers
 Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit: 
 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)
 Other keywords and placeholders
 CodeRabbit Configuration File ( | 
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
packages/invoice-dashboard/src/lib/react/InvoiceDashboard.d.ts (1)
12-13: Document the purpose of decryption propsThe new props would benefit from JSDoc documentation explaining:
- The purpose of decryption in the context of invoices
- When and why users might want to enable/disable decryption
- Any side effects of enabling/disabling decryption
Consider adding documentation like this:
export interface InvoiceDashboardProps { config: IConfig; wagmiConfig: WagmiConfig; requestNetwork: RequestNetwork | null | undefined; currencies: CurrencyTypes.CurrencyInput[]; + /** Indicates whether invoice decryption is currently enabled */ isDecryptionEnabled: boolean; + /** Callback to enable or disable invoice decryption */ enableDecryption: (option: boolean) => void; }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
- package-lock.jsonis excluded by- !**/package-lock.json
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
- packages/create-invoice-form/CHANGELOG.md(1 hunks)
- packages/create-invoice-form/package.json(2 hunks)
- packages/invoice-dashboard/CHANGELOG.md(1 hunks)
- packages/invoice-dashboard/package.json(2 hunks)
- packages/invoice-dashboard/src/lib/react/InvoiceDashboard.d.ts(2 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- packages/create-invoice-form/CHANGELOG.md
- packages/invoice-dashboard/CHANGELOG.md
🔇 Additional comments (3)
packages/invoice-dashboard/src/lib/react/InvoiceDashboard.d.ts (1)
12-13: Consider making decryption props optional
If decryption is an optional feature, consider making these props optional to maintain backward compatibility.
Let's check if these props are always required by searching for their usage:
If the props are optional, update the interface:
export interface InvoiceDashboardProps {
-  isDecryptionEnabled: boolean;
-  enableDecryption: (option: boolean) => void;
+  isDecryptionEnabled?: boolean;
+  enableDecryption?: (option: boolean) => void;
}packages/create-invoice-form/package.json (1)
38-38: Verify dependency updates for breaking changes
The updates to @wagmi/core and viem are minor version bumps. Please ensure there are no breaking changes in these versions that could affect the package.
Let's check the changelogs:
Also applies to: 40-40
✅ Verification successful
Dependency updates are safe to proceed
The changelogs for both dependencies show no breaking changes that would affect the package:
- 
@wagmi/core@2.15.2:- Minor change: Removed simulation in writeContract&sendTransaction
- Patch change: Bumped Metamask SDK version
 
- Minor change: Removed simulation in 
- 
viem@2.21.53:- Only patch changes: Updated ApeScan API URL and added Multicall address
 
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Fetch changelog or release notes for the updated versions
gh api repos/wagmi-dev/wagmi/releases | jq -r '.[] | select(.tag_name | contains("@wagmi/core@2.15")) | .body'
gh api repos/wagmi-dev/viem/releases | jq -r '.[] | select(.tag_name | contains("2.21.53")) | .body'
Length of output: 1335
packages/invoice-dashboard/package.json (1)
3-3: Version bump aligns with type changes
The patch version bump (0.11.2 -> 0.11.3) is appropriate for the type definition changes and dependency updates.
Motivation
I forgot to add types for the new properties for Lit Protocol Changes. There is also an issue with wagmi version
Changes
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
create-invoice-formandinvoice-dashboardpackages to reflect recent type fixes.Dependency Updates
@wagmi/coreandviem.Documentation