[Components] ngrok #14293
[Components] ngrok #14293
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎ 1 Skipped Deployment
|
|
@jcortes is attempting to deploy a commit to the Pipedreamers Team on Vercel. A member of the Team first needs to authorize it. |
WalkthroughThe changes introduce four new actions for managing HTTPS edges in the Ngrok API: creating, deleting, updating, and retrieving details of HTTPS edges. Each action is encapsulated in its own module, defining necessary properties and methods for API interaction. Additionally, the main Ngrok application file has been updated to support these actions with new properties and methods, and the package version has been incremented along with a new dependency. Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Poem
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 (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (15)
components/ngrok/package.json (1)
3-3: Version update looks good. Consider adding a changelog entry.The version bump from 0.0.1 to 0.1.0 correctly reflects the addition of new features (HTTPS edge management actions) as per semantic versioning principles.
Consider adding a CHANGELOG.md file or updating an existing one to document the new features introduced in this version.
components/ngrok/actions/delete-https-edge/delete-https-edge.mjs (4)
1-17: LGTM! Consider enhancing the action description.The import statement and action configuration look good. The props are correctly defined, and the
edgeIdis appropriately referenced from theapp.Consider adding a brief explanation of what an HTTPS Edge is in the description for better clarity. For example:
- description: "Delete an HTTPS Edge. [See the documentation](https://ngrok.com/docs/api/resources/edges-https/#delete-https-edge).", + description: "Delete an HTTPS Edge, which is a secure tunnel endpoint in ngrok. [See the documentation](https://ngrok.com/docs/api/resources/edges-https/#delete-https-edge).",
18-27: LGTM! Consider adding error handling.The
deleteHTTPSEdgemethod is well-structured and correctly uses theedgeIdto construct the API endpoint path. The use of rest parameters provides flexibility for additional arguments.Consider adding basic error handling to improve robustness:
deleteHTTPSEdge({ edgeId, ...args } = {}) { + if (!edgeId) { + throw new Error("edgeId is required"); + } return this.app.delete({ path: `/edges/https/${edgeId}`, ...args, }); },
28-41: LGTM! Consider enhancing error handling and return value.The
runmethod is well-structured, using async/await and destructuring effectively. The export of a summary message provides good user feedback.Consider the following improvements:
- Add try/catch block for better error handling:
- Return more detailed information on success:
async run({ $ }) { const { deleteHTTPSEdge, edgeId, } = this; - await deleteHTTPSEdge({ - $, - edgeId, - }); - $.export("$summary", "Successfully deleted HTTPS edge."); - return { - success: true, - }; + try { + const response = await deleteHTTPSEdge({ + $, + edgeId, + }); + $.export("$summary", `Successfully deleted HTTPS edge with ID: ${edgeId}`); + return { + success: true, + id: edgeId, + response, + }; + } catch (error) { + $.export("$summary", `Failed to delete HTTPS edge: ${error.message}`); + throw error; + } },
1-42: Great implementation! Aligns well with PR objectives.The "Delete HTTPS Edge" action is well-implemented and aligns perfectly with the PR objectives. It provides a clean and focused solution for deleting an HTTPS Edge in ngrok.
Key strengths:
- Clear and concise implementation
- Proper use of Pipedream action structure
- Alignment with ngrok API documentation
The suggested improvements in previous comments (enhancing description, error handling, and return value) will further increase the robustness and user-friendliness of this action.
To ensure consistency across the ngrok component, consider creating shared utility functions for common operations like error handling and response formatting. This would promote code reuse and maintain a uniform approach across all ngrok actions.
components/ngrok/actions/get-https-edge/get-https-edge.mjs (4)
3-8: LGTM: Action metadata is well-defined.The action metadata is comprehensive and follows best practices:
- The key, name, and description are clear and informative.
- Including the API documentation link in the description is helpful for users.
- The type is correctly set to "action".
Consider implementing a versioning strategy for future updates. For example, you might want to use semantic versioning (MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH) for easier tracking of changes.
9-17: LGTM: Props are well-defined, consider adding input validation.The props definition is clear and follows good practices:
- The 'app' prop is included, which likely provides core functionality.
- The 'edgeId' prop uses a propDefinition, promoting reusability and consistency.
Consider adding input validation for the 'edgeId' prop to ensure it meets any required format or constraints. This could be done within the propDefinition or in the run method.
18-27: LGTM: getHTTPSEdge method is well-implemented.The 'getHTTPSEdge' method is well-structured and follows good practices:
- Clear and descriptive method name.
- Good use of object destructuring with a default empty object.
- Correct usage of 'edgeId' in the API path.
- Flexibility provided by spreading additional arguments.
Consider adding error handling within this method. For example, you could catch any errors thrown by 'this.app._makeRequest' and provide more context-specific error messages.
28-39: LGTM: run method is well-implemented, consider adding error handling and response validation.The 'run' method is well-structured and follows good practices:
- Correct use of async/await.
- Good use of destructuring for clarity.
- Provides user feedback with '$.export'.
- Returns the full response for potential further processing.
Consider the following improvements:
- Add error handling using try/catch to gracefully handle any errors during the API call.
- Implement response validation to ensure the expected data is received before exporting the summary.
Example:
async run({ $ }) { const { getHTTPSEdge, edgeId } = this; try { const response = await getHTTPSEdge({ $, edgeId }); if (!response || !response.id) { throw new Error('Invalid response received'); } $.export("$summary", `Successfully retrieved HTTPS edge with ID \`${response.id}\`.`); return response; } catch (error) { $.export("$summary", `Failed to retrieve HTTPS edge: ${error.message}`); throw error; } }components/ngrok/actions/create-https-edge/create-https-edge.mjs (3)
3-9: LGTM: Action definition is well-structured.The action definition is clear and provides necessary information. However, consider enhancing the description slightly for better clarity.
Consider updating the description to:
- description: "Create an HTTPS Edge. [See the documentation](https://ngrok.com/docs/api/resources/edges-https/#create-https-edge).", + description: "Create a new HTTPS Edge in your ngrok account. [See the API documentation](https://ngrok.com/docs/api/resources/edges-https/#create-https-edge) for more details.",This change provides more context about what the action does and where it operates.
30-37: LGTM: Method definition is well-structured, but consider adding error handling.The
createHTTPSEdgemethod effectively encapsulates the API call, which is a good practice. The use of the spread operator forargsprovides flexibility for passing additional options.Consider adding basic error handling to improve robustness:
createHTTPSEdge(args = {}) { - return this.app.post({ - path: "/edges/https", - ...args, - }); + try { + return this.app.post({ + path: "/edges/https", + ...args, + }); + } catch (error) { + throw new Error(`Failed to create HTTPS edge: ${error.message}`); + } },This change will provide more context if the API call fails, making it easier to debug issues.
38-57: LGTM: Run method implementation is solid, but consider adding error handling.The run method is well-structured and implements the action correctly. The conditional stringification of metadata and the informative summary message are good practices.
Consider adding error handling to provide more context in case of failures:
async run({ $ }) { const { createHTTPSEdge, description, hostports, metadata, } = this; - const response = await createHTTPSEdge({ - $, - data: { - description, - hostports, - metadata: metadata && JSON.stringify(metadata), - }, - }); - $.export("$summary", `Successfully created new HTTPS edge with ID \`${response.id}\`.`); - return response; + try { + const response = await createHTTPSEdge({ + $, + data: { + description, + hostports, + metadata: metadata && JSON.stringify(metadata), + }, + }); + $.export("$summary", `Successfully created new HTTPS edge with ID \`${response.id}\`.`); + return response; + } catch (error) { + $.export("$summary", `Failed to create HTTPS edge: ${error.message}`); + throw error; + } },This change will provide better error reporting and maintain consistency with the successful case.
components/ngrok/actions/update-https-edge/update-https-edge.mjs (1)
46-66: LGTM with a suggestion: Consider adding error handling.The run method is well-implemented, using async/await correctly and handling the API call and response appropriately. The summary export provides good user feedback.
Consider adding try/catch error handling to provide more informative error messages to the user. For example:
async run({ $ }) { try { // ... existing code ... } catch (error) { $.export("$summary", `Failed to update HTTPS Edge: ${error.message}`); throw error; } }components/ngrok/ngrok.app.mjs (2)
68-76: Add error handling to '_makeRequest' methodCurrently, the
_makeRequestmethod does not handle errors that may occur during HTTP requests. Adding error handling will improve the robustness of your component by gracefully managing API errors and providing meaningful feedback.Apply this diff to include basic error handling:
return axios($, { ...args, url: url || this.getUrl(path), headers: this.getHeaders(headers), }).catch((error) => { + // Emit an error event or handle the error as appropriate + this.$emit('Error making API request', { + error: error.message, + url: url || this.getUrl(path), + }); + throw error; });
69-69: Clarify default parameter assignment for '$'In the
_makeRequestmethod parameters, you're using default assignment$ = this. While this is valid, it might improve readability to explicitly pass$when the method is called, or to avoid default parameters for class instance variables.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
pnpm-lock.yamlis excluded by!**/pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
- components/ngrok/actions/create-https-edge/create-https-edge.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/ngrok/actions/delete-https-edge/delete-https-edge.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/ngrok/actions/get-https-edge/get-https-edge.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/ngrok/actions/update-https-edge/update-https-edge.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/ngrok/ngrok.app.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/ngrok/package.json (2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (11)
components/ngrok/package.json (1)
15-17: New dependency added. Verify its usage across the component.The addition of @pipedream/platform as a dependency is noted. This likely provides necessary functionality for the new HTTPS edge management actions.
Please ensure that this dependency is actually used in the component's code. Run the following script to verify its usage:
components/ngrok/actions/get-https-edge/get-https-edge.mjs (1)
1-1: LGTM: Import statement is correct.The import statement is properly structured and imports the necessary 'app' module from the correct relative path.
components/ngrok/actions/create-https-edge/create-https-edge.mjs (3)
1-1: LGTM: Import statement is correct.The import statement correctly imports the main ngrok app, which is likely to contain shared functionality for the component.
1-57: Overall, the implementation is well-structured and achieves the intended purpose.The "Create HTTPS Edge" action is implemented correctly and aligns with the PR objectives. The code follows best practices, is well-organized, and provides the necessary functionality to create an HTTPS Edge using the ngrok API.
Some minor improvements have been suggested:
- Enhancing the action description for clarity.
- Clarifying which props are required vs. optional.
- Adding error handling in the
createHTTPSEdgemethod andrunmethod.These suggestions aim to improve the robustness and user-friendliness of the implementation. Great job on this new feature!
9-29: Props definition looks good, but clarification needed.The props definition aligns with the ngrok API requirements for creating an HTTPS edge. Using
propDefinitionpromotes reusability, which is a good practice.Could you clarify which props are required and which are optional? This information would be helpful for users of this action. Consider adding comments or using a structure that clearly indicates required vs. optional props.
To verify the prop definitions, let's check the main app file:
components/ngrok/actions/update-https-edge/update-https-edge.mjs (4)
1-8: LGTM: Import and action metadata look good.The import statement and action metadata are well-structured. The inclusion of the API documentation link in the description is a good practice for maintainability.
9-35: LGTM: Props definition is well-structured.The props are correctly defined using propDefinitions from the app, which promotes code reuse and consistency. All necessary properties for updating an HTTPS edge are included.
36-45: LGTM: updateHTTPSEdge method is well-implemented.The method uses object destructuring effectively and constructs the API path correctly. The use of
this.app.patchsuggests proper integration with the ngrok app module.
1-67: Great implementation of the Update HTTPS Edge action.The code is well-structured, follows best practices, and aligns perfectly with the PR objective of implementing an action to update HTTPS edges. It makes good use of the ngrok app module and provides a clean interface for updating HTTPS edges.
A few points of note:
- Good use of propDefinitions for consistency across the component.
- Effective use of async/await and proper handling of the API call.
- Clear and informative summary export for user feedback.
The only suggestion for improvement would be to add error handling as mentioned in the previous comment.
Overall, this is a solid implementation that should integrate well with the rest of the ngrok component.
components/ngrok/ngrok.app.mjs (2)
77-94: HTTP method wrappers are correctly implementedThe
post,patch, anddeletemethods correctly wrap_makeRequestwith the appropriate HTTP methods. This implementation promotes code reuse and maintains consistency across API calls.
33-40: Verify the API response structure for 'listHTTPSEdges'Ensure that the
listHTTPSEdgesmethod returns the expected structure, especially thenext_page_uriandhttps_edgesproperties. This is crucial for the pagination logic in theoptionsmethod to function correctly.Run the following script to confirm the API response structure:
Replace
$NGROK_API_KEYwith your actual Ngrok API key. Ensure that the response includes thenext_page_uriandhttps_edgesfields.
WHY
Resolves #14272
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation
Chores