feat: add separateResponse param to incoming webhooks for optional per-channel responses markdown
#36386
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
|
Looks like this PR is ready to merge! 🎉 |
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 77becba The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 36 packages
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
Contributor
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #36386 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 65.57% 65.57% -0.01%
===========================================
Files 3172 3172
Lines 105477 105477
Branches 20041 20058 +17
===========================================
- Hits 69170 69166 -4
- Misses 33627 33629 +2
- Partials 2680 2682 +2
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
abhinavkrin
changed the title
separateResponse param to incoming webhooks for optional per-channel responses markdown Copy EditseparateResponse param to incoming webhooks for optional per-channel responses markdown
abhinavkrin
force-pushed
the
feat/separate-api-response-for-webhooks-on-multiple-channels
branch
2 times, most recently
from
2536d92 to
40b38ea
Compare
Signed-off-by: Abhinav Kumar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Abhinav Kumar <[email protected]>
abhinavkrin
force-pushed
the
feat/separate-api-response-for-webhooks-on-multiple-channels
branch
from
40b38ea to
f5e7af8
Compare
Signed-off-by: Abhinav Kumar <[email protected]>
MarcosSpessatto
suggested changes
Jul 16, 2025
Signed-off-by: Abhinav Kumar <[email protected]>
MarcosSpessatto
approved these changes
Jul 17, 2025
abhinavkrin
added
the
stat: QA assured
dionisio-bot
bot
added
the
stat: ready to merge
…n-multiple-channels
…n-multiple-channels
kodiakhq
bot
deleted the
feat/separate-api-response-for-webhooks-on-multiple-channels
branch
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Proposed changes (including videos or screenshots)
Adds a new boolean parameter
separateResponseto the incoming webhook configuration. When enabled, the API will return an array of result objects—one per channel—indicating individual success or error. IfseparateResponseis disabled (the default), the server will first validate all target channels; on validation failure it returns a singlesuccess: falsewithout sending any messages, or on success it sends to all channels and returnssuccess: true.This PR also fixes an issue where in an outgoing integrations, if the message returned from the webhook had multiple channels, the messages would be sent but it would show only one channel in history.
Issue(s)
Steps to test or reproduce
separateResponsein the payload. When true -> separate response will be returned. In case of falsy -> message wont be sent to either of the channels since it would have failed for the channel which the user can't access.Further comments
SUP-779