Remove pricing page#12247
Conversation
Remove Roo Code Cloud and Router remnants
Roo to zoo upgrade
Add issue templates
- Delete apps/web-roo-code/src/app/pricing/ directory - Delete apps/web-roo-code/src/app/provider/pricing/ directory - Remove Pricing link from desktop and mobile navigation - Remove View Pricing button from cloud and cloud/team pages - Remove ModelCard import and price sorting options from provider page - Remove pricing FAQ from provider page
yuvarajl
requested review from
cte,
daniel-lxs,
hannesrudolph,
jr and
mrubens
as code owners
dosubot
Bot
added
the
size:XXL
![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
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 6b70af8b63
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".
| if (nextSettings.provider === LEGACY_PROVIDER_PREFERENCE_ROO) { | ||
| nextSettings.provider = DEFAULT_PROVIDER | ||
| migrated = true |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When legacy CLI settings are migrated from provider: "roo" to openrouter, the migration keeps the old model value unchanged. Existing users who previously saved Roo-only model IDs (for example roo/...) will then run with openrouter + an incompatible model and can hit immediate request failures until they manually override the model. The migration should also normalize model (or clear it) when rewriting the provider.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| case TaskCommandName.GetModels: | ||
| try { | ||
| const models = await getModels({ | ||
| provider: "roo" as const, | ||
| baseUrl: process.env.ROO_CODE_PROVIDER_URL ?? "https://api.roocode.com/proxy", | ||
| apiKey: CloudService.hasInstance() | ||
| ? CloudService.instance.authService?.getSessionToken() | ||
| : undefined, | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| sendResponse(RooCodeEventName.ModelsResponse, [models]) | ||
| sendResponse(RooCodeEventName.ModelsResponse, [{}]) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This handler now responds with an empty model map unconditionally, so any IPC client using TaskCommandName.GetModels can no longer discover available models even when providers are configured correctly. Before this change the branch fetched models and only fell back to {} on error; now successful calls are indistinguishable from failure and break model-listing integrations.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
3 participants
Related GitHub Issue
Closes: #
Roo Code Task Context (Optional)
Description
Test Procedure
Pre-Submission Checklist
Screenshots / Videos
Documentation Updates
Additional Notes
Get in Touch
Interactively review PR in Roo Code Cloud