[codex] Unify module workbench routes#38
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changed
dev-tenant./app/modules/{moduleId}and retire the standalone/app/digital-twinentry.Why
/app/projectswas calling the database-backed backend with a non-UUID tenant id, which causedtenant_id must be a UUID. Digital Twin also had two competing surfaces, while the repository source of truth requires the module route to use the same Open CDE workbench as all other modules.Validation
bun x next typegenbun run typecheckbun run lintbun run testbun run build/v1/projectsreturns tenant-scoped projects with UUID headers./app/projectsreturns 200 and renders 2 projects./app/modules/..../app/modules/digital_twinreturns 200./app/digital-twinreturns 404.