fix(client): don't overwrite call members on call.update

[jdimovska]

💡 Overview

This PR fixes an issue where call.update overwrites the local members state with an empty array from the backend response.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Fixed an issue where call members were unexpectedly cleared when updating custom call properties. Members are now properly preserved during these operations.

[changeset-bot]

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 90a009f

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Disabled knowledge base sources:

• Linear integration is disabled

You can enable these sources in your CodeRabbit configuration.

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 6d4e2d7 and 90a009f.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• packages/client/src/Call.ts
• packages/client/src/__tests__/Call.test.ts

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The Call.update method is modified to no longer extract and apply members from API responses. A corresponding test ensures that members remain uncleared when custom call data is updated, validating the new behavior.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Members Extraction Removal packages/client/src/Call.ts	Removes destructuring of members from the response in Call.update and eliminates the subsequent members state update call. Other update operations (call state and own capabilities) remain unchanged.
Test Coverage packages/client/src/__tests__/Call.test.ts	Adds new test case verifying that members are not cleared when updating custom call data, ensuring the modified behavior is preserved.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

Poem

🐰 Members stay put, no clearing in sight,
Custom data flows, everything's right,
When updates arrive with fresh data in hand,
The members stand tall, just as we planned! 🌟

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Description check	❓ Inconclusive	The description includes the Overview section but is missing the Implementation notes section and ticket/docs references specified in the template.	Add Implementation notes explaining the technical approach and include ticket/docs links to complete the description template.

✅ Passed checks (2 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately describes the main change: preventing call.update from overwriting the local members state.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ 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 update-members-issue

Tip

Try Coding Plans. Let us write the prompt for your AI agent so you can ship faster (with fewer bugs).
Share your feedback on Discord.

---

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.}