chore: exposed BidScreening REST and made ResourceOffer repeated by vertex451 · Pull Request #282 · akash-network/chain-sdk

vertex451 · 2026-04-06T21:06:10Z

Out of scope

Fixed proto-check-breaking CI step and local run as well.
Temorary disabled that check for the BidScreening change, since I am changing the message field in place(Since it is not in production yet)

Changes

exposed BidScreening via REST
made resource_offer field repeated. We need it to cover multiple ResourceUnits in the GroupSpec. Currently, we can return only one offer in response, offers for other ResourceUnits are ignored.

Related to akash-network/provider#386

coderabbitai · 2026-04-06T21:06:29Z

Note

Reviews paused

It looks like this branch is under active development. To avoid overwhelming you with review comments due to an influx of new commits, CodeRabbit has automatically paused this review. You can configure this behavior by changing the reviews.auto_review.auto_pause_after_reviewed_commits setting.

Use the following commands to manage reviews:

@coderabbitai resume to resume automatic reviews.
@coderabbitai review to trigger a single review.

Use the checkboxes below for quick actions:

▶️ Resume reviews
🔍 Trigger review

Walkthrough

Added an HTTP POST mapping for ProviderRPC.BidScreening; replaced singular resource_offer with repeated resource_offers in BidScreeningResponse; updated CI/workflow and Makefile to fetch origin main and run proto breaking checks against a temporary git worktree directory.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Provider RPC & HTTP mapping `proto/provider/akash/provider/v1/service.proto`	Added `option (google.api.http) = { post: "/v1/bid-screening", body: "", response_body: "" }` to `ProviderRPC.BidScreening`, exposing the RPC at POST `/v1/bid-screening`.
BidScreeningResponse schema `proto/provider/akash/provider/v1/validation.proto`	Removed/reserved singular `resource_offer` (field 3) and added `repeated akash.market.v1beta5.ResourceOffer resource_offers = 5` with updated `customname`, JSON/YAML tags and an updated comment describing per-ResourceUnits offers.
CI workflow: fetch main `.github/workflows/breakage.yaml`	Added a step to fetch `origin main` into local `main` branch (`git fetch origin main:main`).
Makefile: proto-breaking against worktree `make/lint.mk`	Added `PROTO_AGAINST_DIR := $(AKASH_DEVCACHE_TMP)/proto-against`; `proto-check-breaking` now creates a git worktree at `$(PROTO_AGAINST_DIR)`, copies `go/vendor` into it, runs `$(BUF) breaking --against '$(PROTO_AGAINST_DIR)'`, and removes the worktree (replacing prior `.git#branch=main` usage).

Estimated code review effort

🎯 4 (Complex) | ⏱️ ~45 minutes

Poem

🐇 I munched some proto by lantern light,
One field became many, small and bright.
A POST door opened, HTTP clear,
I planted a worktree — CI draws near.
Hoppity hop, the meadow's right! 🌿

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Description check	⚠️ Warning	The PR description deviates significantly from the required template, lacking structured sections and key information needed for proper review and tracking.	Restructure the description to follow the template: add a clear 2-3 sentence summary, use the Purpose of Change checkboxes, properly format Related Issues and Checklist sections, and move implementation notes to the Reviewers section.

✅ Passed checks (2 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately summarizes both main changes: exposing BidScreening REST endpoint and making ResourceOffer repeated.
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 unit tests (beta)

Create PR with unit tests
Commit unit tests in branch artem/precheck

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

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

coderabbitai

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In `@proto/provider/akash/provider/v1/validation.proto`:
- Around line 45-50: The proto was changed to a repeated field named
ResourceOffers (JSON tag resource_offers) but generated Go still exposes a
singular ResourceOffer (json: "resource_offer"); regenerate the protobuf
artifacts so the Go types and JSON tags match the proto: re-run the proto build
step (e.g., protoc with the same plugins used in the repo) that produces
validation.pb.go, ensuring the message in validation.proto (ResourceOffers) is
reflected as a repeated field in the regenerated validation.pb.go and any
affected marshal/unmarshal helpers are updated.

🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
Create a new PR with the fixes

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 3d0a3cdc-2f75-4c60-82f6-715c760626f1

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 97e43ee and b46ae99.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

proto/provider/akash/provider/v1/service.proto
proto/provider/akash/provider/v1/validation.proto

coderabbitai

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In `@proto/provider/akash/provider/v1/validation.proto`:
- Around line 49-53: The generated TypeScript protobuf artifacts are out of sync
with the proto change: proto/provider/akash/provider/v1/validation.proto now
defines a repeated field resource_offers, but
ts/src/generated/protos/akash/provider/v1/validation.ts still treats it as a
singular message.resourceOffer and emits obj.resource_offer; regenerate the TS
protobuf outputs (re-run the protobuf/ts codegen toolchain) so the generated
code maps the repeated field to an array (resource_offers) consistently in
serialization/deserialization rather than hand-editing the generated file.

🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
Create a new PR with the fixes

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: ffec0dba-7982-484b-bb08-3e35d2706727

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b46ae99 and 54bb7bd.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (3)

go/provider/v1/service.pb.go is excluded by !**/*.pb.go
go/provider/v1/service.pb.gw.go is excluded by !**/*.pb.gw.go
go/provider/v1/validation.pb.go is excluded by !**/*.pb.go

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

proto/provider/akash/provider/v1/validation.proto

coderabbitai

Actionable comments posted: 2

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In @.github/workflows/breakage.yaml:
- Around line 27-29: Replace the overlay copy that uses "cp -r" into the
worktree with a clean replace of the destination vendor directory: after "git
worktree add /tmp/proto-against main" remove or delete
"/tmp/proto-against/go/vendor" entirely and then copy the local "go/vendor" into
"/tmp/proto-against/go/" (or use a sync that deletes extraneous files) so
removed upstream files do not remain; update the workflow step that runs "cp -r
go/vendor /tmp/proto-against/go/" to first delete the destination vendor
directory (or use a sync-with-delete) to ensure a clean replacement.

In `@make/lint.mk`:
- Around line 32-36: The PROTO_AGAINST default value is being truncated because
Make treats '#' as the start of a comment; update the variable assignment
(PROTO_AGAINST) to escape the hash (e.g., use .git\#branch=main) so the full ref
string is retained, ensuring the proto-check-breaking target (which calls $(BUF)
breaking --against '$(PROTO_AGAINST)') compares against the intended baseline;
keep the rest of the target (proto-check-breaking and BUF usage) unchanged.

🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
Create a new PR with the fixes

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: c768c609-3b23-4707-9ead-cc42867c5d8c

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d843990 and 99dd1e1.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)

ts/src/generated/protos/akash/provider/v1/service_akash.ts is excluded by !**/generated/**
ts/src/generated/protos/akash/provider/v1/validation.ts is excluded by !**/generated/**

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

.github/workflows/breakage.yaml
make/lint.mk

vertex451 · 2026-04-07T12:12:11Z

+      use:
+        - FILE
+      ignore:
+        - proto/provider/akash/provider/v1/validation.proto


Temporary ignoring that file to pass the proto CI check.
Will remove it in the follow up PR.

no need to do this, can remove this

vertex451 requested a review from a team as a code owner April 6, 2026 21:06

github-actions Bot added the C:proto/provider label Apr 6, 2026

coderabbitai Bot reviewed Apr 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread proto/provider/akash/provider/v1/validation.proto Outdated

github-actions Bot added the C:go/provider label Apr 6, 2026

coderabbitai Bot reviewed Apr 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread proto/provider/akash/provider/v1/validation.proto Outdated

github-actions Bot added Type: CI Type: Build C:ts labels Apr 6, 2026

coderabbitai Bot reviewed Apr 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread .github/workflows/breakage.yaml Outdated

Comment thread make/lint.mk Outdated

vertex451 force-pushed the artem/precheck branch from 07d4c4a to a151168 Compare April 7, 2026 11:55

fix: removed resource_offer field from BidScreeningResponse

cfddfff

vertex451 force-pushed the artem/precheck branch from a151168 to cfddfff Compare April 7, 2026 12:01

vertex451 commented Apr 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread make/lint.mk

fix: removed ingoring rule

48fd3af

vertex451 requested a review from troian April 7, 2026 17:03

troian approved these changes Apr 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

vertex451 merged commit cce5283 into main Apr 7, 2026
9 of 10 checks passed

vertex451 deleted the artem/precheck branch April 7, 2026 17:13

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

chore: exposed BidScreening REST and made ResourceOffer repeated#282

chore: exposed BidScreening REST and made ResourceOffer repeated#282
vertex451 merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
artem/precheck

vertex451 commented Apr 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented Apr 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Reviews paused

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

vertex451 Apr 7, 2026

Uh oh!

troian Apr 7, 2026

Uh oh!

vertex451 Apr 7, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Conversation

vertex451 commented Apr 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Out of scope

Changes

Related to akash-network/provider#386

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented Apr 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviews paused

Walkthrough

Changes

Estimated code review effort

Poem

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

vertex451 Apr 7, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

troian Apr 7, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

vertex451 Apr 7, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

vertex451 commented Apr 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

coderabbitai Bot commented Apr 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading