-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 114
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: criteo audience null check #2939
Conversation
Important Auto Review SkippedAuto reviews are disabled on this repository. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the To trigger a single review, invoke the 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 X ? TipsChat with CodeRabbit Bot (
|
Quality Gate passedKudos, no new issues were introduced! 0 New issues |
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.
responseBuilder, prepareResponse, these names pretty similar, we should fix in some other PR
@@ -15,6 +15,9 @@ const { preparePayload } = require('./util'); | |||
|
|||
const prepareResponse = (payload, audienceId, accessToken) => { | |||
const response = defaultRequestConfig(); | |||
if (!audienceId) { |
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.
should this check happen in responseBuilder?
This PR is considered to be stale. It has been open for 20 days with no further activity thus it is going to be closed in 7 days. To avoid such a case please consider removing the stale label manually or add a comment to the PR. |
What are the changes introduced in this PR?
added criteo audience null check
Write a brief explainer on your code changes.
Please explain the objectives of your changes below
Put down any required details on the broader aspect of your changes. If there are any dependent changes, mandatorily mention them here
Type of change
If the pull request is a bug-fix, enhancement or a refactor, please fill in the details on the changes made.
Existing capabilities/behavior
New capabilities/behavior
If the pull request is a new feature,
Any technical or performance related pointers to consider with the change?
N/A
Any new dependencies introduced with this change?
N/A
Any new generic utility introduced or modified. Please explain the changes.
N/A
If the PR has changes in more than 10 files, please mention why the changes were not split into multiple PRs.
N/A
If multiple linear tasks are associated with the PR changes, please elaborate on the reason:
N/A
Developer checklist
No breaking changes are being introduced.
Are all related docs linked with the PR?
Are all changes manually tested?
Does this change require any documentation changes?
Are relevant unit and component test-cases added?
Reviewer checklist
Is the type of change in the PR title appropriate as per the changes?
Verified that there are no credentials or confidential data exposed with the changes.