Skip to content

Conversation

toddbaert
Copy link
Member

@toddbaert toddbaert commented Aug 14, 2025

As astutely pointed out by @JasperJuergensen in #1227, we added API surface in core which we use in the latest web, but did't accordingly update the min version of core in web.

(I also updated the min core version in server, just because).

Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
@toddbaert toddbaert requested review from a team as code owners August 14, 2025 15:07
Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Summary of Changes

Hello @toddbaert, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses an oversight where new API surface from the @openfeature/core package was being used in the web package without a corresponding update to its minimum required version. It also updates the server package's core dependency. The change ensures that both web and server packages correctly declare their dependency on a version of @openfeature/core that includes the necessary API.

Highlights

  • Dependency Update for web package: The @openfeature/core dependency in packages/web/package.json has been updated from ^1.8.0 to ^1.9.0 for both peerDependencies and devDependencies.
  • Dependency Update for server package: The @openfeature/core dependency in packages/server/package.json has been updated from ^1.7.0 to ^1.9.0 for both peerDependencies and devDependencies.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request updates the @openfeature/core dependency to ^1.9.0 in peerDependencies and devDependencies for both the @openfeature/server-sdk and @openfeature/web-sdk packages. This change is necessary to incorporate new API surface from the core package, as described in the pull request. The changes in this PR are correct and address the stated issue.

However, to ensure consistency and prevent potential dependency issues across the monorepo, I recommend updating dependencies in other packages as well. These could be addressed in this PR or a follow-up:

  • packages/angular/projects/angular-sdk/package.json: The devDependency on @openfeature/core is ^1.8.1. Consider updating it to ^1.9.0.
  • packages/nest/package.json: The devDependency on @openfeature/core is *. This can lead to non-deterministic builds. It would be best to change this to ^1.9.0 to align with its peer dependency @openfeature/server-sdk's new requirement.
  • packages/react/package.json: The devDependencies for @openfeature/core and @openfeature/web-sdk are both *. This is risky. I suggest updating @openfeature/core to ^1.9.0 and @openfeature/web-sdk to ^1.6.0 (its current version) for better stability.

Making these additional changes would improve the overall health of the repository's dependencies.

@toddbaert
Copy link
Member Author

Code Review

This pull request updates the @openfeature/core dependency to ^1.9.0 in peerDependencies and devDependencies for both the @openfeature/server-sdk and @openfeature/web-sdk packages. This change is necessary to incorporate new API surface from the core package, as described in the pull request. The changes in this PR are correct and address the stated issue.

However, to ensure consistency and prevent potential dependency issues across the monorepo, I recommend updating dependencies in other packages as well. These could be addressed in this PR or a follow-up:

  • packages/angular/projects/angular-sdk/package.json: The devDependency on @openfeature/core is ^1.8.1. Consider updating it to ^1.9.0.
  • packages/nest/package.json: The devDependency on @openfeature/core is *. This can lead to non-deterministic builds. It would be best to change this to ^1.9.0 to align with its peer dependency @openfeature/server-sdk's new requirement.
  • packages/react/package.json: The devDependencies for @openfeature/core and @openfeature/web-sdk are both *. This is risky. I suggest updating @openfeature/core to ^1.9.0 and @openfeature/web-sdk to ^1.6.0 (its current version) for better stability.

Making these additional changes would improve the overall health of the repository's dependencies.

dev deps don't matter in this case.

@toddbaert toddbaert merged commit 845d24c into main Aug 14, 2025
11 checks passed
@toddbaert toddbaert deleted the fix/core-dep branch August 14, 2025 17:03
toddbaert pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 14, 2025
🤖 I have created a release *beep* *boop*
---


##
[1.6.1](web-sdk-v1.6.0...web-sdk-v1.6.1)
(2025-08-14)


### 🐛 Bug Fixes

* update core dep
([#1228](#1228))
([845d24c](845d24c))

---
This PR was generated with [Release
Please](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please). See
[documentation](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please#release-please).

Signed-off-by: OpenFeature Bot <[email protected]>
toddbaert added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 14, 2025
🤖 I have created a release *beep* *boop*
---


##
[1.19.0](server-sdk-v1.18.0...server-sdk-v1.19.0)
(2025-08-14)


### ✨ New Features

* add evaluation-scoped hook data
([#1216](#1216))
([07af3a9](07af3a9))


### 🐛 Bug Fixes

* update core dep
([#1228](#1228))
([845d24c](845d24c))


### 🧹 Chore

* update node to v20+
([#1203](#1203))
([1f33453](1f33453))


### 📚 Documentation

* Clarify the behavior of setProviderAndWait
([#1180](#1180))
([4fe8d87](4fe8d87))

---
This PR was generated with [Release
Please](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please). See
[documentation](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please#release-please).

Signed-off-by: OpenFeature Bot <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants