just hotfixing the validation message

[Baalmart]

Description

just hotfixing the validation message

Changes Made

• just hotfixing the validation message

Testing

• Tested locally
• Tested against staging environment
• Relevant tests passed: [List test names]

Affected Services

• Which services were modified:
  • Auth Service

Endpoints Ready for Testing

• New endpoints ready for testing:
  • REPLACE preferences

API Documentation Updated?

• Yes, API documentation was updated
• No, API documentation does not need updating

Additional Notes

just hotfixing the validation message

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Enhanced validation logic for site identifiers, now focusing on site_id when allowId is false.
  • Updated error messages to improve clarity regarding validation issues.

• Bug Fixes

  • Improved error handling for site validation, ensuring structured responses for validation errors.

• Documentation

  • Revised comments to accurately describe the validation process for site_id.

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The changes in the validateSelectedSites middleware focus on updating the validation logic for site identifiers. The primary modification involves switching from validating the _id field to the site_id field when the allowId flag is set to false. Additionally, error messages and comments have been updated to reflect this change, while the overall structure and error handling of the middleware remain consistent.

Changes

File Path	Change Summary
src/auth-service/middleware/validateSelectedSites.js	Updated validation logic to check site_id instead of _id when allowId is false; modified error messages and comments accordingly; removed default value for allowId.

Possibly related PRs

• refactoring the createValidateSelectedSitesField middleware function #3658: Refactors the createValidateSelectedSitesField middleware, related to validation logic for site identifiers.
• temporarily disabled input validation #3684: Temporarily disables input validation for the selected_sites field, impacting the validation logic modified in the main PR.
• Enhance Middleware to Support Validation of Optional Selected Sites as Array or Object #3699: Enhances the validateSelectedSites middleware to support validation of selected_sites as an array or an object, aligning with the changes in the main PR.

Suggested reviewers

• Codebmk

🎉 In the land of code, a change took flight,
Validating sites, making logic bright.
From _id to site_id, the shift was clear,
With comments and errors, we hold them dear.
In the middleware dance, integrity stays,
Celebrating our work in these joyful arrays! 🎉

---

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?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 11.69%. Comparing base (e9ed65b) to head (55eeb48).
Report is 25 commits behind head on staging.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           staging    #3728   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    11.69%   11.69%           
========================================
  Files          110      110           
  Lines        14847    14847           
  Branches       274      274           
========================================
  Hits          1737     1737           
  Misses       13110    13110           

[github-actions]

Auth-service changes in this PR available for preview here

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)

src/auth-service/middleware/validateSelectedSites.js (1)

55-57: Validation logic looks good with a minor suggestion.

The site_id validation logic is well-implemented and the error message is clear. However, for consistency with other validation messages in the file, consider adding quotes around the field name in the error message.

- siteErrors.push("site_id must be a valid MongoDB ObjectId");
+ siteErrors.push("'site_id' must be a valid MongoDB ObjectId");

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 44eb997 and 55eeb48.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• src/auth-service/middleware/validateSelectedSites.js (1 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

📓 Learnings (1)

src/auth-service/middleware/validateSelectedSites.js (1)

Learnt from: Baalmart
PR: airqo-platform/AirQo-api#3699
File: src/auth-service/middleware/validateSelectedSites.js:7-8
Timestamp: 2024-10-20T13:41:41.354Z
Learning: In the `validateSelectedSites` middleware, inputs may be provided not only via `selected_sites` but also directly in `req.body`, so the code handles both cases appropriately.

🔇 Additional comments (1)

src/auth-service/middleware/validateSelectedSites.js (1)

Line range hint 5-5: Consider preserving the default value for backward compatibility.

The removal of the default value allowId = false could be a breaking change for existing callers that rely on this parameter being optional. Since this PR's objective is to hotfix the validation message, we should minimize the risk of unintended side effects.

Suggested fix:

- const validateSelectedSites = (requiredFields, allowId = false) => {
+ const validateSelectedSites = (requiredFields, allowId = false) => {

Let's verify the usage of this middleware to assess the impact: