Implement initial taggedCommFarcasterResponder with dummy logic
Depends on D13701
Details
Details
Triggered webhook event on warpcast and successfully received created cast event which passed validation
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rCOMM Comm
- Lint
No Lint Coverage - Unit
No Test Coverage
Event Timeline
| keyserver/src/responders/farcaster-webhook-responders.js | ||
|---|---|---|
| 17 ↗ | (On Diff #45284) | This is a dummy statement. This will be removed in a future diff and replaced with relevant logic |
| lib/types/farcaster-types.js | ||
| 65 ↗ | (On Diff #45284) | Originally tried to using NeynarChannel for this but backtracked as it meant loosening constraints. The webhook event neynar channel object does not include description, follower_count, and lead |
| keyserver/src/responders/handlers.js | ||
|---|---|---|
| 129 ↗ | (On Diff #45284) | What's the point of this line? Seems like we could just spread responderResult directly on line 130 |
| lib/types/farcaster-types.js | ||
| 45–75 ↗ | (On Diff #45284) | 3/4 of these types fully enumerate all of their properties. But in the validator code below, you use t.interface for all of them. Either the types are incorrect (you need to add ... to some of them), or some of the validators should use tShape. |
| 52 ↗ | (On Diff #45284) | Can we be more specific than Object? |
| 60 ↗ | (On Diff #45284) | Can we be more specific than Object? |
| keyserver/src/responders/handlers.js | ||
|---|---|---|
| 129 ↗ | (On Diff #45284) | Yes. This was unnecessary. Going to directly spread responderResult in next rebase. |
| lib/types/farcaster-types.js | ||
| 45–75 ↗ | (On Diff #45284) | It's the former. We likely shouldn't rely on Neynar/Farcaster to not add additional fields, so I plan to add ... to the next rebase |
| 52 ↗ | (On Diff #45284) | I'm actually thinking I'll remove this for now |
| 60 ↗ | (On Diff #45284) | We're not using embeds for my current work. Removing |
| keyserver/src/responders/handlers.js | ||
|---|---|---|
| 129 ↗ | (On Diff #45334) | You still have this unnecessary line |