[Components] PixelBin: New action components #14146
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 several new actions to the Pixelbin application, including functionalities for creating folders, uploading files and assets from URLs, listing files, and deleting files. Additionally, utility functions and constants are added to facilitate these operations, enhancing the application's capabilities for asset management and API interactions. Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
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: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (18)
components/pixelbin/package.json (1)
15-18: New dependencies look appropriate.The addition of
@pipedream/platformandform-dataaligns with the PR objectives, particularly for implementing file upload functionality. The version specifications are suitable.Consider pinning the
form-datadependency to a specific version (e.g., "4.0.0" instead of "^4.0.0") to ensure consistent behavior across different environments. This is optional but can help prevent potential issues caused by minor updates.components/pixelbin/common/constants.mjs (1)
1-4: LGTM! Consider adding comments for clarity.The constants are well-defined and follow good naming conventions. The use of a version placeholder is a good practice for API versioning.
Consider adding brief comments to explain the purpose of
DEFAULT_MAXandDEFAULT_LIMITfor better clarity. For example:// Maximum number of items to retrieve in a single API call const DEFAULT_MAX = 600; // Default number of items to retrieve per page const DEFAULT_LIMIT = 100;components/pixelbin/common/utils.mjs (3)
1-7: LGTM with a suggestion for error handlingThe
iteratefunction correctly implements asynchronous iteration and collection of items. However, consider adding error handling to make the function more robust.Consider wrapping the iteration in a try-catch block:
async function iterate(iterations) { const items = []; - for await (const item of iterations) { - items.push(item); + try { + for await (const item of iterations) { + items.push(item); + } + } catch (error) { + console.error('Error during iteration:', error); + throw error; // or handle it as appropriate for your use case } return items; }
9-28: LGTM with a suggestion for type checkingThe
appendPropsToFormDatafunction correctly handles different types of values and appends them to the FormData object. The use ofString()for conversion is a good practice.Consider adding a type check for the
formparameter to ensure it's a FormData object:function appendPropsToFormData(form, props) { + if (!(form instanceof FormData)) { + throw new TypeError('First argument must be a FormData object'); + } Object.entries(props) .forEach(([ key, value, ]) => { // ... rest of the function }); }
30-33: LGTM with a suggestion for input validationThe
getNestedPropertyfunction correctly handles nested property access and safely returnsundefinedfor non-existent paths. The use of optional chaining is a good practice.Consider adding input validation for the
propertyStringparameter:function getNestedProperty(obj, propertyString) { + if (typeof propertyString !== 'string') { + throw new TypeError('propertyString must be a string'); + } const properties = propertyString.split("."); return properties.reduce((prev, curr) => prev?.[curr], obj); }components/pixelbin/actions/delete-file/delete-file.mjs (3)
9-24: LGTM: Props are well-defined. Consider adding type information.The props are correctly defined, with 'path' properly set as required and restricted to file selection only.
Consider adding type information to the 'path' prop for better code documentation:
path: { optional: false, + type: "string", propDefinition: [ // ... (rest of the code remains the same) ], },
25-33: LGTM: deleteFile method is well-implemented. Consider adding error handling.The deleteFile method correctly uses the app.delete method to send a DELETE request with the proper path construction.
Consider adding error handling to improve robustness:
deleteFile({ path, ...args }) { + if (!path) { + throw new Error("Path is required for file deletion"); + } return this.app.delete({ path: `/files/${path}`, ...args, }); },
35-46: LGTM: run method is well-implemented. Consider destructuring directly in the parameter.The run method correctly orchestrates the file deletion process and provides a summary message.
For improved clarity and conciseness, consider destructuring directly in the method parameter:
-async run({ $ }) { - const { - deleteFile, - path, - } = this; +async run({ $, path }) { const response = await deleteFile({ $, path, }); $.export("$summary", `Successfully deleted file with ID \`${response._id}\`.`); return response; },components/pixelbin/actions/create-folder/create-folder.mjs (3)
9-26: Props are well-defined, with a minor suggestion.The props for
nameandpathare correctly implemented. The requirednameprop and optionalpathprop align well with the action's purpose.Consider adding a pattern validation for the
pathprop to ensure it follows a valid folder path format. This could prevent potential errors when creating folders.Example:
path: { description: "Path of the containing folder. Eg. `folder1/folder2`.", propDefinition: [ app, "path", ], pattern: "^[a-zA-Z0-9_/]+$", patternError: "Path should only contain alphanumeric characters, underscores, and forward slashes.", },
27-34: createFolder method is implemented correctly, with a suggestion for improvement.The
createFoldermethod correctly uses the app'spostmethod to send a request to the "/folders" endpoint. The use of the spread operator forargsprovides flexibility.Consider adding basic error handling within the method. This could involve wrapping the API call in a try-catch block and providing more context in case of an error. For example:
createFolder(args = {}) { try { return this.app.post({ path: "/folders", ...args, }); } catch (error) { throw new Error(`Failed to create folder: ${error.message}`); } }This would provide more informative error messages and make debugging easier for users of this action.
35-51: run method is well-implemented, with a suggestion for error handling.The
runmethod effectively uses async/await and destructuring. The summary export provides good user feedback, and returning the response allows for further processing if needed.Consider adding a try-catch block to handle potential errors more gracefully. This would allow you to provide more specific error messages to the user. For example:
async run({ $ }) { const { createFolder, name, path, } = this; try { const response = await createFolder({ $, data: { name, path, }, }); $.export("$summary", `Successfully created folder with ID \`${response._id}\`.`); return response; } catch (error) { $.export("$summary", `Failed to create folder: ${error.message}`); throw error; } }This change would ensure that any errors are caught and reported clearly, improving the user experience when troubleshooting.
components/pixelbin/actions/list-files/list-files.mjs (2)
9-38: Props are well-defined, but consider adding validation for the format prop.The props are correctly implemented and align with the Pixelbin API requirements. The use of propDefinitions ensures consistency with the Pixelbin app.
Consider adding validation or providing a list of allowed values for the
formatprop to prevent potential errors with unsupported formats. This could be implemented as an enum or by using a propDefinition from the Pixelbin app if available.
39-61: Run method is well-implemented, but consider adding error handling.The run method is correctly implemented using async/await and properly utilizes the app.paginate method for efficient result retrieval. The use of props for filtering is appropriate.
Consider adding try/catch error handling to gracefully manage potential API errors and provide more informative error messages to the user. For example:
async run({ $ }) { try { // ... existing code ... } catch (error) { $.export("$summary", `Failed to list files: ${error.message}`); throw error; } }components/pixelbin/actions/upload-asset-url/upload-asset-url.mjs (3)
9-58: Props definition looks good, with a minor suggestion.The props are well-defined and cover all necessary parameters for uploading an asset from a URL. The use of propDefinitions ensures consistency across the application.
Consider adding a
required: trueproperty to theurlprop definition, as it's essential for this action:url: { type: "string", label: "URL", description: "URL of the asset you want to upload.", + required: true, },
59-66: uploadAssetFromUrl method looks good, but could be improved.The method correctly uses the app's post method for making the API call. The use of parameter spreading allows for flexibility.
Consider adding input validation and error handling to improve robustness:
uploadAssetFromUrl(args = {}) { + if (!args.data || !args.data.url) { + throw new Error("URL is required for uploading an asset."); + } - return this.app.post({ - path: "/upload/url", - ...args, - }); + return this.app.post({ + path: "/upload/url", + ...args, + }).catch(error => { + throw new Error(`Failed to upload asset: ${error.message}`); + }); },
67-96: run method is well-structured but lacks error handling.The method effectively uses async/await and property destructuring for clean code. The summary export provides good user feedback.
Consider adding error handling and response validation:
async run({ $ }) { const { uploadAssetFromUrl, url, path, name, access, tags, metadata, overwrite, filenameOverride, } = this; + if (!url) { + throw new Error("URL is required for uploading an asset."); + } + try { const response = await uploadAssetFromUrl({ $, data: { url, path, name, access, tags, metadata, overwrite, filenameOverride, }, }); + if (!response || !response._id) { + throw new Error("Invalid response received from the API."); + } $.export("$summary", `Successfully uploaded asset with ID: \`${response._id}\`.`); return response; + } catch (error) { + $.export("$summary", `Failed to upload asset: ${error.message}`); + throw error; + } },components/pixelbin/actions/upload-file/upload-file.mjs (2)
63-73: LGTM: The uploadFile method is correctly implemented.The
uploadFilemethod correctly uses theapp.postmethod to send a POST request to the "/upload/direct" endpoint. The Content-Type header is properly set for multipart/form-data, and the use of the spread operator allows for flexible argument passing.Consider adding explicit error handling within the
uploadFilemethod to provide more detailed error information specific to file uploads. This could improve debugging and user feedback. For example:uploadFile(args = {}) { return this.app.post({ path: "/upload/direct", headers: { "Content-Type": "multipart/form-data", }, ...args, }).catch(error => { throw new Error(`File upload failed: ${error.message}`); }); },
74-111: LGTM: The run function is well-implemented with proper file handling.The
runfunction correctly validates thefilePath, efficiently reads the file usingfs.createReadStream, and properly constructs the form data. The use ofutils.appendPropsToFormDatafor adding additional properties is a good practice for maintainability.Consider adding a try-catch block to handle potential errors during the file reading or upload process. This would allow for more specific error messages and proper cleanup if needed. For example:
async run({ $ }) { // ... existing destructuring ... if (!filePath.startsWith("/tmp/")) { throw new ConfigurationError("File must be located in `/tmp` directory."); } let fileStream; try { const data = new FormData(); fileStream = fs.createReadStream(filePath); data.append("file", fileStream); utils.appendPropsToFormData(data, { path, name, access, tags, metadata, overwrite, filenameOverride, }); const response = await uploadFile({ $, data, }); $.export("$summary", `Successfully uploaded file with ID \`${response._id}\`.`); return response; } catch (error) { throw new Error(`File upload failed: ${error.message}`); } finally { if (fileStream) fileStream.close(); } },This structure ensures that the file stream is properly closed, even if an error occurs during the upload process.
📜 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 (9)
- components/pixelbin/actions/create-folder/create-folder.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/pixelbin/actions/delete-file/delete-file.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/pixelbin/actions/list-files/list-files.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/pixelbin/actions/upload-asset-url/upload-asset-url.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/pixelbin/actions/upload-file/upload-file.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/pixelbin/common/constants.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/pixelbin/common/utils.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/pixelbin/package.json (2 hunks)
- components/pixelbin/pixelbin.app.mjs (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (20)
components/pixelbin/package.json (3)
3-3: Version update looks good.The version bump from 0.0.1 to 0.1.0 correctly reflects the addition of new features (actions) as outlined in the PR objectives. This change adheres to semantic versioning principles.
12-14: PublishConfig update is correct.The addition of
"access": "public"in thepublishConfigsection is appropriate. This ensures that the package can be published publicly to the npm registry, which is consistent with its intended use as a Pipedream component.
Line range hint
1-19: Overall package.json changes look good.The updates to
package.jsonare consistent with the PR objectives of introducing new PixelBin action components. The version bump, new dependencies, and publish configuration are all appropriate for the described changes. These modifications set up the necessary groundwork for implementing the new actions (upload-file, upload-asset-url, list-files, delete-file, and create-folder) as outlined in the linked issue #14122.components/pixelbin/common/constants.mjs (3)
21-27: LGTM! Export structure is clean and comprehensive.The default export includes all necessary constants and the API object. This approach makes it easy to import all the constants at once in other files, promoting clean and efficient code organization.
1-27: Overall, excellent foundation for Pixelbin integration!This constants file provides a well-structured foundation for the Pixelbin integration, aligning well with the PR objectives. It defines the necessary constants and API structure that will be used by the action components mentioned in the PR description (upload-file, upload-asset-url, list-files, delete-file, create-folder).
The use of version placeholders and organized API object structure will facilitate the implementation of these actions and make future maintenance easier. Great job on setting up this crucial piece of the integration!
6-19: LGTM! Verify TRANSFORMATION versioning.The API object is well-structured, allowing for easy management of different API versions. The use of
VERSION_PLACEHOLDERin the paths is consistent with the constant defined earlier.Could you please verify if the TRANSFORMATION section intentionally doesn't have version identifiers? If it should have versioning, consider adding it for consistency. If not, it might be helpful to add a comment explaining why versioning is not needed for this section.
components/pixelbin/common/utils.mjs (2)
35-39: LGTM: Exports are correctly definedThe export statement correctly includes all the defined utility functions, making them easily accessible when importing this module.
1-39: Overall assessment: Well-implemented utility functions with minor improvement suggestionsThis new file introduces well-implemented utility functions for the Pixelbin component. The functions are concise, handle edge cases, and provide useful functionality. The suggested improvements focus on enhancing error handling and input validation, which would further increase the robustness of these utilities.
Great job on implementing these utility functions! They will certainly contribute to the efficiency and reliability of the Pixelbin component.
components/pixelbin/actions/delete-file/delete-file.mjs (1)
1-8: LGTM: Import and action metadata are well-defined.The import statement and action metadata are correctly implemented. The inclusion of a documentation link in the description is a good practice for user reference.
components/pixelbin/actions/create-folder/create-folder.mjs (2)
1-8: LGTM: Import and action metadata look good.The import statement and action metadata are well-defined. The inclusion of a documentation link is particularly helpful for users.
1-52: Overall implementation aligns well with PR objectives.The "Create Folder" action for Pixelbin is well-implemented and aligns perfectly with the PR objectives. It provides the necessary functionality to create a new folder in Pixelbin, as outlined in the linked issue #14122.
Key points:
- The action's metadata, props, and methods are clearly defined.
- The implementation correctly uses the Pixelbin API to create folders.
- User feedback is provided through the summary export.
The suggestions for improvements (input validation for the path prop and error handling) would further enhance the robustness and user-friendliness of this action.
Great job on implementing this new action component for PixelBin!
components/pixelbin/actions/list-files/list-files.mjs (3)
1-8: LGTM: Import and action metadata are well-defined.The import statement and action metadata are correctly implemented. The inclusion of a documentation link in the description is particularly helpful for users.
62-64: LGTM: Result handling and export are appropriate.The summary export and result return are well-implemented. The summary provides useful feedback to the user about the number of files listed.
1-65: Overall, the "List Files" action is well-implemented with minor suggestions for improvement.The action correctly implements the file listing functionality for Pixelbin, with appropriate use of pagination, prop definitions, and result handling. Consider implementing the suggested improvements:
- Add validation for the
formatprop to prevent potential errors with unsupported formats.- Implement error handling in the
runmethod to provide more informative error messages to the user.These enhancements will further improve the robustness and user-friendliness of the action.
components/pixelbin/actions/upload-asset-url/upload-asset-url.mjs (2)
1-8: LGTM: Import and action metadata look good.The import statement and action metadata are well-structured. The inclusion of a documentation link in the description is a good practice for user reference.
1-97: Overall implementation aligns well with PR objectives.The "Upload Asset From URL" action is well-implemented and includes all necessary components. It aligns with the objectives outlined in the PR description for integrating PixelBin functionalities.
Key points:
- The action correctly implements the 'upload-asset-url' functionality.
- Props cover all necessary parameters for the upload process.
- The implementation uses the PixelBin API as described in the documentation.
While the core functionality is sound, consider implementing the suggested improvements for error handling and input validation to enhance the robustness of the action.
components/pixelbin/actions/upload-file/upload-file.mjs (4)
1-5: LGTM: Imports are appropriate and consistent.The imports cover all necessary modules for file operations, form data handling, error management, and local utility functions. The use of ES6 import syntax is consistent throughout.
7-12: LGTM: Action metadata is well-defined.The action metadata is complete and follows a standard structure. The inclusion of a documentation link in the description is a good practice. The version "0.0.1" correctly indicates this is the initial implementation.
13-62: LGTM: Props are well-defined and use propDefinitions where appropriate.The props section is comprehensive and uses propDefinitions from the app object for consistency. The manually defined
filePathprop includes a helpful description about the/tmpdirectory usage, which is crucial for users to understand.
1-112: Overall, excellent implementation of the upload-file action for Pixelbin.The code successfully implements the upload-file action as specified in the PR objectives. It's well-structured, follows good practices, and covers all necessary aspects including metadata, props, methods, and execution logic.
Key strengths:
- Proper use of the Pipedream platform and Pixelbin app integration.
- Efficient file handling using streams.
- Comprehensive prop definitions with good use of propDefinitions.
- Clear and informative action metadata.
Suggestions for improvement:
- Enhanced error handling in the
uploadFilemethod andrunfunction.- Ensuring proper cleanup of file streams in case of errors.
These minor enhancements would further improve the robustness and maintainability of the code.
2 participants
WHY
Resolves #14122
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation
Chores