fix: taking plan type from usage endpoint instead of thru auth token#7610
fix: taking plan type from usage endpoint instead of thru auth token#7610
Conversation
zhao-oai
force-pushed
the
dev/zhao/plan-type-refactor
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d3aa9a5 to
a8a2e64
Compare
|
@codex review |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
codex/codex-rs/app-server/src/outgoing_message.rs
Lines 245 to 249 in a8a2e64
Add planType to rate limit notification expectation
The RateLimitSnapshot type now includes a plan_type field, and serde will serialize it as "planType": null when it’s unset. In verify_account_rate_limits_notification_serialization the expected JSON still lists only primary, secondary, and credits, so serde_json::to_value will now produce an extra planType entry and the assertion will fail. Please update the expected payload (or skip-serialize plan_type) so the test matches the new wire format.
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".
zhao-oai
force-pushed
the
dev/zhao/plan-type-refactor
branch
5 times, most recently
from
89d837e to
f896d65
Compare
|
@codex review |
zhao-oai
force-pushed
the
dev/zhao/plan-type-refactor
branch
from
f896d65 to
4ba709a
Compare
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. 🎉 ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
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". |
zhao-oai
force-pushed
the
dev/zhao/plan-type-refactor
branch
from
4ba709a to
0e24624
Compare
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
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".
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Already looking forward to the next diff. ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
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". |
etraut-openai
left a comment
etraut-openai
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I left one comment about removing some now-obsolete calls in the auth crate, but the rest looks good to me.
zhao-oai
force-pushed
the
dev/zhao/plan-type-refactor
branch
from
0e24624 to
ed80a67
Compare
2 participants
pull plan type from the usage endpoint, persist it in session state / tui state, and propagate through rate limit snapshots