-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 131
fix(rivetkit): fix onError handler not working #3455
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(rivetkit): fix onError handler not working #3455
Conversation
|
Deployment failed with the following error: Learn More: https://vercel.com/docs/limits#rate-limits |
Code ReviewSummaryThis PR fixes the Changes Overview
Code Quality ✅Strengths:
Potential Issues 🔍Minor:
Performance Considerations ✅No performance concerns. The change actually improves performance slightly by:
Security Concerns ✅No security issues identified. Error handling is properly configured on the router before being passed to this function. Test Coverage
|
0ff831e to
60aeb32
Compare
89cf636 to
5fa1ff1
Compare
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
3 Skipped Deployments
|
Code ReviewSummaryThis PR fixes a bug where the What ChangedBefore: The After: The function now accepts a single pre-configured Hono AnalysisPositive Aspects ✅
Potential Concerns
|
Code ReviewSummaryThis PR fixes an issue where the onError handler in the manager router was not being properly applied. The root cause was that crossPlatformServe was creating a new Hono instance instead of using the router that already had error handlers configured via router.onError(handleRouteError) at manager/router.ts:131. Positive Changes
Code Quality AssessmentOverall: Good - The changes are minimal, focused, and solve a specific problem. Strengths:
Concerns
Security ConsiderationsNo security concerns identified. The changes don't introduce new attack vectors. Performance ConsiderationsPositive Impact: By removing the creation of an unnecessary Hono instance, there's a minor performance improvement (one less object allocation). Suggestions for Follow-up
RecommendationApprove with minor suggestions - The core fix is solid and addresses a real bug. The suggestions above are nice-to-haves that can be addressed in follow-up PRs if needed. The most important one is adding test coverage to prevent regression. Review performed by Claude Code following CLAUDE.md conventions |
5fa1ff1 to
7a00c89
Compare
60aeb32 to
2ae9f22
Compare
4a72d89 to
0ceae4a
Compare
51383ee to
049afaa
Compare
|
Deployment failed with the following error: Learn More: https://vercel.com/docs/limits#rate-limits |
Code ReviewSummaryThis PR fixes a bug where the Changes AnalysisBefore:
After:
Review Feedback✅ Positive aspects:
Security & Performance
RecommendationsOptional improvements (not blockers):
Verdict: ✅ Approved - This is a solid bug fix that correctly addresses the issue with minimal code changes. The fix is well-scoped and does not introduce any new risks. Review generated by Claude Code |
Pull Request ReviewSummaryThis PR fixes a bug where the What Changed
Code Quality: ✅ ExcellentStrengths:
Potential IssuesMinor:
Performance: ✅ No ConcernsThe change slightly improves performance by eliminating unnecessary Hono instance creation. Security: ✅ No ConcernsNo security issues identified. Error handlers are properly configured before the router is exposed. Breaking Changes: ✅ NoneThe Recommendations
Verdict: ✅ LGTM - ApproveThis is a well-executed fix that addresses the root cause correctly. The architectural simplification is a bonus. The suggestions above are optional improvements that can be addressed in follow-up work if desired. Review performed following CLAUDE.md conventions |
Merge activity
|
0ceae4a to
c1f60cd
Compare
049afaa to
106b484
Compare
PR Review: fix(rivetkit): fix onError handler not workingSummaryThis PR fixes a bug where the Code Quality ✅Positive aspects:
Minor observations:
Bug Analysis ✅The root cause was clear: the previous code created a new The fix correctly passes the fully configured router directly, ensuring all middleware and error handlers work as expected. Performance Considerations ✅
Security Concerns ✅No security issues identified. The change doesn't affect:
Test Coverage
|
c1f60cd to
3ece7ec
Compare
106b484 to
18c686e
Compare
PR Review: Fix onError handler not workingSummaryThis PR fixes a bug where the Changes Analysis1. Simplified
2. Updated call site (mod.ts:223)
Root Cause AnalysisThe bug occurred because:
Code Quality ✅Strengths:
Minor observations:
Potential Issues ✅ None FoundThe changes are straightforward and low-risk:
Performance Considerations ✅Improvements:
Security Concerns ✅ NoneThe error handling fix actually improves security by ensuring that:
Test Coverage
|
18c686e to
50ca10d
Compare
Code ReviewSummaryThis PR fixes a bug where the AnalysisRoot CauseThe previous implementation in
The problem is that error handlers ( The FixThe fix removes the unnecessary indirection:
This ensures that:
Code QualityPositive aspects:
Minor observations:
Testing ConsiderationsThe error handling paths should be tested to verify this fix works correctly:
Potential ConcernsNone identified. This is a straightforward bug fix that:
RecommendationApprove ✅ This is a clean fix for a legitimate bug. The change improves code quality by removing unnecessary abstraction while fixing the error handler registration issue. Note: Consider adding integration tests that verify error handlers work correctly to prevent regression. |
Code Review for PR #3455: fix(rivetkit): fix onError handler not workingSummaryThis PR fixes a critical bug where the AnalysisRoot Cause
The Fix
Code Quality: ✅ GoodStrengths:
Minor observations:
Potential Issues: ✅ None FoundNo bugs or issues identified. The fix correctly addresses the root cause. Performance: ✅ Neutral/Slight Improvement
Security: ✅ No ConcernsNo security issues introduced or fixed. Error handling is properly preserved. Test Coverage:
|

No description provided.