feat(approvals): surface Account/Term/Payment/Monthly + user email in Approval queue by cristim · Pull Request #713 · LeanerCloud/cloud-commitments-cli

cristim · 2026-05-25T17:57:28Z

Closes #704.

Approval queue was missing operationally-critical columns (Account, Term, Payment, Monthly Cost) and showing raw user UUIDs instead of emails. Backend already had the data; frontend just didn't expose it.

Changes

internal/config/types.go — added CreatedByUserEmail to PurchaseHistoryRecord (excluded from DB persistence).
internal/api/handler_history.go — executionToHistoryRow takes a createdByEmail param; new resolveUserEmails (one GetUser per distinct creator UUID, fails gracefully); fetchExecutionsAsHistory builds the cache once and passes the resolved email per row.
internal/api/handler_history_test.go — TestHandler_getHistory_CreatedByUserEmailResolved (happy path + graceful lookup-failure).
frontend/src/types.ts — HistoryPurchase gains account_id, payment, monthly_cost, created_by_user_email.
frontend/src/recommendations.ts — exports getAccountName backed by the existing accountNamesCache so history.ts reuses it.
frontend/src/history.ts — renderApprovalQueue adds Account / Term / Payment / Monthly Cost columns; Created-by renders email with UUID then dash fallback.
6 new tests in history-approval-queue.test.ts.

Row 1.3 decision (Effective Savings)

Chose Option B (keep label as 'Monthly Savings' — matches the actual semantic of estimated_savings). No formula change.

Tests

backend go test ./internal/api/... → 1234 pass
frontend history-approval-queue.test.ts → 13 pass
tsc + go vet + pre-commit clean

coderabbitai · 2026-05-25T17:57:34Z

Warning

Review limit reached

@cristim, we couldn't start this review because you've reached your PR review rate limit.

More reviews will be available in 10 minutes and 13 seconds. Learn how PR review limits work.

Your organization has run out of usage credits. Purchase more in the billing tab.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans include higher PR review limits than trial, open-source, and free plans. In all cases, reviews become available again over time. During sustained high-volume PR review activity, CodeRabbit may temporarily slow when the next review becomes available.

Please see our Fair Usage Limits Policy for further information.

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 6091f508-c9d7-42ff-950c-825cc3028bd3

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between fdcede3 and e3ca433.

📒 Files selected for processing (7)

frontend/src/__tests__/history-approval-queue.test.ts
frontend/src/history.ts
frontend/src/recommendations.ts
frontend/src/types.ts
internal/api/handler_history.go
internal/api/handler_history_test.go
internal/config/types.go

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

Create PR with unit tests
Commit unit tests in branch feat/704-approval-queue-columns

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

cristim · 2026-05-25T19:58:35Z

@coderabbitai review

coderabbitai · 2026-05-25T19:58:39Z

✅ Actions performed

Review triggered.

Note: CodeRabbit is an incremental review system and does not re-review already reviewed commits. This command is applicable only when automatic reviews are paused.

cristim · 2026-05-25T20:26:29Z

@coderabbitai review

coderabbitai · 2026-05-25T20:26:33Z

✅ Actions performed

Review triggered.

Note: CodeRabbit is an incremental review system and does not re-review already reviewed commits. This command is applicable only when automatic reviews are paused.

cristim · 2026-05-25T20:58:59Z

@coderabbitai review

coderabbitai · 2026-05-25T20:59:05Z

✅ Actions performed

Review triggered.

Note: CodeRabbit is an incremental review system and does not re-review already reviewed commits. This command is applicable only when automatic reviews are paused.

cristim · 2026-05-25T21:33:17Z

@coderabbitai review

coderabbitai · 2026-05-25T21:33:22Z

✅ Actions performed

Review triggered.

Note: CodeRabbit is an incremental review system and does not re-review already reviewed commits. This command is applicable only when automatic reviews are paused.

cristim · 2026-05-25T22:08:12Z

@coderabbitai review

coderabbitai · 2026-05-25T22:08:17Z

✅ Actions performed

Review triggered.

Note: CodeRabbit is an incremental review system and does not re-review already reviewed commits. This command is applicable only when automatic reviews are paused.

… Approval queue Add Account, Term, Payment, Monthly Cost columns to the Approval queue renderer and show the creator's email (resolved from the auth service) instead of the raw UUID. Backend: PurchaseHistoryRecord gains CreatedByUserEmail (non-persisted). executionToHistoryRow accepts the resolved email; fetchExecutionsAsHistory builds a per-request user-ID-to-email cache via resolveUserEmails (one GetUser call per distinct creator, logs+skips on failure). Frontend types: HistoryPurchase extended with account_id, payment, monthly_cost, created_by_user_email (term was already present). recommendations.ts exports getAccountName() so history.ts can resolve account names from the shared cache without duplicating the map. renderApprovalQueue gains Account/Term/Payment/Monthly Cost columns; the Created-by cell falls back UUID -> "-" when email is absent. Effective Savings column: the existing "Monthly Savings" label already matches the actual semantic (estimated_savings is a monthly figure), so no rename or formula change is needed (row 1.3 resolved by option B). Tests: two new Go sub-tests for email resolution and graceful degradation; six new TS tests covering each new column and the email/UUID fallback chain. Closes #704

cristim · 2026-05-25T22:53:40Z

Rebased onto feat/multicloud-web-frontend@6f6b68b4d to resolve conflicts in internal/api/handler_history.go and internal/api/handler_history_test.go (conflict source: #716 history filter params). #716's historyFilters + matchesExecution filter on the executions half is preserved verbatim; #713's resolveUserEmails cache + executionToHistoryRow(... createdByEmail) plumbing + CreatedByUserEmail field is preserved verbatim. The handler now runs the filter check FIRST (cheap short-circuit) and only resolves the email for executions that survive. In the test file, #716's TestParseHistoryDateRange (and its three FilterParams/FilterValidation/DateRangeBoundary siblings) coexists with #713's new TestHandler_getHistory_CreatedByUserEmailResolved.

go test ./internal/api/... ./internal/config/... -> 1819 passed. go vet ./... clean. gofmt -l clean on touched files. Frontend: npx tsc --noEmit clean; jest --testPathPattern=history -> 142 passed (includes the approval-queue suite).

New HEAD: e3ca43308.

@coderabbitai review

coderabbitai · 2026-05-25T22:53:54Z

@cristim: Thanks for the detailed rebase summary! The conflict resolution approach — running the filter check first as a short-circuit before the email resolution — is a nice optimization. Triggering a review of the updated HEAD (e3ca43308) now.

✅ Actions performed

Review triggered.

Note: CodeRabbit is an incremental review system and does not re-review already reviewed commits. This command is applicable only when automatic reviews are paused.

…e rows (closes #733) (#734) PR #713 added the Account, Term, Payment, and Monthly Cost columns to the Approval queue card; the columns render but every row showed "-" because the backend never copied those fields onto the synthesised PurchaseHistoryRecord: - Account: executionToHistoryRow read exec.CloudAccountID, but the web-initiated bulk-purchase flow (buildPendingExecution) only populates the per-recommendation CloudAccountID and leaves the execution-level field nil. Fall back to a new collapseRecommendationAccount helper that returns the shared rec CloudAccountID, or "" (rendered as "-") for a basket genuinely spanning accounts. - Payment: projectRecommendationFields populated Service, ResourceType, Region, Term, UpfrontCost, EstimatedSavings, and (single-rec only) MonthlyCost from the rec, but never set row.Payment. Single-rec now copies r.Payment; multi-rec collapses via collapseRecommendationPayment (same pattern as the existing Provider/Service/Term collapsers), returning "" when recs disagree so the dash fallback stays honest. - MonthlyCost (multi-rec): only the single-rec branch mapped it; the multi-rec branch now sums per-rec MonthlyCost via sumRecommendationMonthlyCost (nil contributes 0, matching the single-rec treatment of nil MonthlyCost). Regression tests: - TestHandler_getHistory_ApprovalQueueColumnsPopulated pins all three shapes (single-rec, multi-rec uniform, multi-rec heterogeneous Payment) so a future refactor cannot silently re-empty the cells. - TestHandler_getHistory_InProgressRowMapsRecFields extended with a Payment assertion. - history-approval-queue.test.ts adds a frontend test that mocks the populated API shape and asserts the cells show real values, not "-".

cristim added triaged Item has been triaged priority/p2 Backlog-worthy severity/medium Moderate harm urgency/this-sprint Within the current sprint impact/many Affects most users effort/m Days type/feat New capability labels May 25, 2026

cristim force-pushed the feat/704-approval-queue-columns branch from 3532540 to e3ca433 Compare May 25, 2026 22:53

cristim merged commit 367e447 into feat/multicloud-web-frontend May 25, 2026
6 checks passed

cristim deleted the feat/704-approval-queue-columns branch May 25, 2026 23:16

Conversation

cristim commented May 25, 2026

Changes

Row 1.3 decision (Effective Savings)

Tests

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 25, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Review limit reached

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

1 participant

coderabbitai Bot commented May 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading