Some other removal of request_id

[arkanoider]

@grunch @bilthon

Removed some others request_id sent to counterpart.

Please double check guys!

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Enhanced error handling and logging for invoice management.
  • Improved cooperative cancellation process by adjusting message handling.

• Bug Fixes

  • Refined order retrieval logic to handle missing or invalid IDs.

• Documentation

  • Added comments for clarity in the invoice and cancellation processes.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The pull request introduces significant modifications to the add_invoice_action and cancellation functions, enhancing error handling and control flow. In add_invoice.rs, the logic for retrieving orders and handling invoice payments has been refined, including improved validation and messaging. In cancel.rs, the handling of the request_id parameter has been adjusted to streamline messaging during cooperative cancellations. These changes collectively improve the robustness and clarity of the functions involved.

Changes

File	Change Summary
src/app/add_invoice.rs	- Enhanced add_invoice_action with improved error handling and logging. - Refined order retrieval logic for invalid/missing IDs. - Updated invoice handling with validation against expected amounts. - Added checks for buyer's public key and order status.
src/app/cancel.rs	- Modified cancel_action, cancel_add_invoice, and cancel_pay_hold_invoice to conditionally set request_id to None in specific contexts. - Streamlined messaging during cooperative cancellations.

Possibly related PRs

• implement request_id on mostro messages #376: Involves handling a request_id in message processing, relevant to the updates in add_invoice_action.
• Rabbit insipired unwrap removal #382: Modifies add_invoice_action with a focus on error handling and messaging, aligning with enhancements in the main PR.
• Avoid sending unsolicited request-id #386: Concerns the removal of the request_id parameter from take_buy_action, relevant to overall handling of request_id in the application.

Poem

🐇 In the meadow where invoices play,
Logic dances, bright as day.
With errors caught and messages clear,
Cancellations flow, no need for fear.
A hop, a skip, through code we glide,
In Rabbit's realm, we take great pride! 🌼

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)

src/app/add_invoice.rs (1)

Line range hint 25-78: request_id is still being sent to counterparts, conflicting with PR objectives

The pull request aims to remove all instances where request_id is sent to counterparts. However, in this code segment, request_id is being retrieved and passed to functions like send_cant_do_msg and send_new_order_msg. These functions may include request_id in messages sent to counterparts, which contradicts the PR's objective.

Please review the usage of request_id in these function calls and ensure it is not sent to counterparts to align with the PR objectives.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 8fd10f3 and 381995f.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• src/app/add_invoice.rs (1 hunks)
• src/app/cancel.rs (4 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (5)

src/app/cancel.rs (4)

Line range hint 139-143: LGTM: Appropriate removal of request_id for counterparty notification

The change correctly removes the request_id when notifying the counterparty about the cooperative cancellation acceptance, as they don't need to track this specific request.

---

Line range hint 164-168: LGTM: Appropriate removal of request_id for cancellation initiation

The change correctly removes the request_id when notifying the counterparty about a new cancellation request. This allows the counterparty to generate their own request_id if they choose to respond to the cancellation request.

---

Line range hint 218-223: LGTM: Consistent removal of request_id across cancellation flows

The changes consistently remove the request_id when sending cancellation notifications to counterparties in both invoice-related cancellation flows. This maintains a uniform pattern across all cancellation scenarios.

Also applies to: 287-292

---

Line range hint 139-292: Verify complete coverage of request_id removal

Let's ensure we haven't missed any instances where request_id might still be sent to counterparties.

✅ Verification successful

All request_id removals for counterparty messages are correctly implemented

Based on the comprehensive search results, I can confirm that:

1. All send_new_order_msg calls to counterparties (peer/seller/buyer) consistently use None for request_id
2. The original messages to the initiating party correctly preserve the request_id
3. The pattern is consistently applied across all relevant modules including cancel, release, and dispute flows

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for potential missed instances of request_id being sent to counterparties

# Look for send_new_order_msg calls that might still pass request_id to counterparties
rg -A 5 "send_new_order_msg.*counterparty|send_new_order_msg.*peer|send_new_order_msg.*seller|send_new_order_msg.*buyer"

# Look for any TODO or FIXME comments related to request_id
rg "TODO.*request_id|FIXME.*request_id"

Length of output: 1400

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's search for all send_new_order_msg calls to get a complete picture
rg -A 3 "send_new_order_msg\(" 

# Also search for any direct references to request_id in message sending contexts
rg -A 3 "request_id.*send|send.*request_id"

Length of output: 14406

src/app/add_invoice.rs (1)

22-26: Good use of comments to enhance code readability

The added comments at lines 22, 24, and 26 improve the clarity of the code by clearly indicating the purpose of each section.

[grunch]

utACK