Fixed retention offer not rendering for 1 mo repeating offers

[sagzy]

closes https://linear.app/ghost/issue/BER-3413

• when a member signs ups with a repeating 1 month offer, the next payment is not discounted
• therefore, they should be able to redeem a retention offer

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Ghost/ghost/core/core/server/services/members/members-api/utils/has-active-offer.js

Lines 29 to 30 in 7ba6ffe

	if (!offerId) {
	return false;

Preserve Stripe discount handling when offer_id is absent

The new if (!offerId) return false path drops the previous check for synced Stripe discounts, so subscriptions with discount_start/discount_end but no mapped offer_id are now treated as having no active offer. This can happen in existing sync paths that keep Stripe discount dates even when offer mapping fails (for example, invalid coupon-to-offer conversion), and it will surface retention offers while the next invoice is still discounted, allowing unintended stacking of discounts.

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: b1f6712a-b402-48a5-a826-3f7b34a87f98

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 7ba6ffe and b6c45dd.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• ghost/core/core/server/services/members/members-api/repositories/member-repository.js
• ghost/core/core/server/services/members/members-api/utils/has-active-offer.js

---

Walkthrough

has-active-offer was changed to accept an optional options parameter and now includes current_period_end in the subscription payload. Legacy discount_start/discount_end branch was removed; offer lookup is performed (offersAPI.getOffer) and discountWindow is derived via getDiscountWindow(subscriptionData, offer). Trial-based early exit remains; errors from offer lookup are caught and treated as blocking (returns true). Two end-to-end retention-offer tests and multiple unit tests were added and test helpers were extended to support startDate and currentPeriodEnd.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.

✅ Passed checks (2 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately describes the main change: fixing retention offers not displaying for 1-month repeating offers, which aligns with the changeset's focus on updating offer evaluation logic.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description is directly related to the changeset, explaining the problem (1-month repeating offers not discounting next payment) and the intended solution (enabling retention offer redemption).

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

• 📝 Generate docstrings (stacked PR)
• 📝 Generate docstrings (commit on current branch)

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment
• Commit unit tests in branch fix/retention-offer-not-showing-for-repeating

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[ErisDS]

🤖 Velo CI Failure Analysis

Classification: 🟠 SOFT FAIL

• Workflow: CI
• Failed Step: E2E tests
• Run: View failed run
  What failed: Code coverage below required threshold
  Why: The failure is caused by a code issue that needs to be fixed in this PR.
  Action:
  Check the error message and fix the issue in your code.