Skip to content

release: 0.14.0#36

Merged
stainless-app[bot] merged 2 commits intomainfrom
release-please--branches--main--changes--next
Oct 3, 2025
Merged

release: 0.14.0#36
stainless-app[bot] merged 2 commits intomainfrom
release-please--branches--main--changes--next

Conversation

@stainless-app
Copy link
Contributor

@stainless-app stainless-app bot commented Oct 3, 2025

Automated Release PR

0.14.0 (2025-10-03)

Full Changelog: v0.13.0...v0.14.0

Features


This pull request is managed by Stainless's GitHub App.

The semver version number is based on included commit messages. Alternatively, you can manually set the version number in the title of this pull request.

For a better experience, it is recommended to use either rebase-merge or squash-merge when merging this pull request.

🔗 Stainless website
📚 Read the docs
🙋 Reach out for help or questions


TL;DR

This release bumps the version to 0.14.0 and introduces support for configuring an HTTP proxy.

Why we made these changes

This allows the SDK to be used in restricted network environments, such as behind a corporate firewall, where API requests must be routed through a proxy.

What changed?

  • Added the ability to configure the client with an HTTP proxy for all outgoing requests.

Validation

  • Client successfully sends requests through a configured proxy.
  • Client fails with an appropriate error if the proxy is unreachable.
  • Client continues to work as expected when no proxy is configured.

Description generated by Mesa. Update settings

Copy link

@mesa-dot-dev mesa-dot-dev bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Performed full review of 0dbee0f...8a4c3c9

Analysis

  1. The PR only mentions adding "http" and "https" protocol options, which may be limiting if other proxy protocols are needed in the future (like SOCKS5 or FTP).

  2. There's no indication of backward compatibility handling - how will existing clients that don't specify a Protocol field behave? A default value or graceful fallback should be clear.

  3. While the PR updates test cases, there's no mention of specific error handling for invalid protocol values that might be submitted.

  4. The string enum approach for protocols could lead to runtime errors rather than compile-time validation, potentially introducing reliability issues in production.

Tip

⚡ Quick Actions

This review was generated by Mesa.

Actions:

Slash Commands:

  • /review - Request a full code review
  • /review latest - Review only changes since the last review
  • /describe - Generate PR description. This will update the PR body or issue comment depending on your configuration
  • /help - Get help with Mesa commands and configuration options

7 files reviewed | 0 comments | Review on Mesa | Edit Reviewer Settings

@stainless-app stainless-app bot merged commit 3dcf211 into main Oct 3, 2025
5 checks passed
@stainless-app
Copy link
Contributor Author

stainless-app bot commented Oct 3, 2025

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant