New Adapter: Matterfull - #4343
Open
Matterfull wants to merge 14 commits into
Open
Conversation
8 tasks
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Code coverage summaryNote:
matterfullRefer here for heat map coverage report |
Code coverage summaryNote:
matterfullRefer here for heat map coverage report |
Collaborator
|
@ShriprasadM can you please review? |
Author
|
@ShriprasadM Hi! Can you please tell me the status of our adapter and what we need to do next? |
Author
|
@ShriprasadM Please let us know if you need anything from our side in order to complete the review. |
SyntaxNode
reviewed
Jun 26, 2025
Code coverage summaryNote:
matterfullRefer here for heat map coverage report |
Contributor
@Matterfull : Was busy with some other work. I will look into this today |
Author
|
@ShriprasadM Do we have any updates? |
scr-oath
requested changes
Jul 9, 2025
Author
|
@scr-oath I fixed the errors according to the last code review. Tell me, I think I incorrectly brought to the current version of the repository and pushed. |
scr-oath
requested changes
Jul 25, 2025
scr-oath
left a comment
scr-oath
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm… I started to review changes in other adapters and then realized - is this merged properly? Why are we picking up other changes and not merely changes to the materfull adapter?
VolodymyrKapatsyn
force-pushed
the
matterfull-bidder-adapter
branch
from
July 28, 2025 10:34
5ef785a to
9e38a98
Compare
Code coverage summaryNote:
matterfullRefer here for heat map coverage report |
Author
|
@scr-oath Hi, we fixed our pull request, the latest changes were added correctly and we ask for a re-code review. |
scr-oath
requested changes
Jul 31, 2025
scr-oath
left a comment
scr-oath
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm so happy that you were able to salvage the review and reduce it down to only your changes. Would you mind ensuring that each outstanding comment is either resolved (can you resolve them?) or has a reply by you if you need more clarification?
Code coverage summaryNote:
matterfullRefer here for heat map coverage report |
Author
|
@scr-oath We have checked and responded to all previous tasks to improve the adapter. The latest found defects have been fixed. Please review the code again. |
Author
|
@scr-oath Please check our latest changes. |
postindustria-code
previously approved these changes
Jul 23, 2026
|
@scr-oath Hi, just checking in on the Matterfull adapter. The follow-up changes addressing your optional review notes are on the current head, and @postindustria-code has re-approved it. The remaining Semgrep failure is the known fork/ |
|
@scr-oath Hi, sorry to ping again. We are still waiting for the second approval on the Matterfull adapter. @postindustria-code has approved the current head, and the branch has not changed since the last reminder. Could you please take another look when you have a moment? Thanks. |
Contributor
|
@przemkaczmarek, @linux019 |
Code coverage summaryNote:
matterfullRefer here for heat map coverage report |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // MakeBids translates Matterfull bid response to prebid-server specific format | ||
| func (adapter *adapter) MakeBids(internalRequest *openrtb2.BidRequest, externalRequest *adapters.RequestData, response *adapters.ResponseData) (*adapters.BidderResponse, []error) { |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The receiver is named adapter, which is the same as the type name.
This is unconventional in Go and creates confusing expressions like
adapter.EndpointTemplate inside a method on *adapter.
PBS convention is a short single-letter (or two-letter) receiver
that abbreviates the type — e.g. a:
func (a *adapter) MakeRequests(...)
func (a *adapter) MakeBids(...)
func (a *adapter) buildAdapterRequest(...)
func (a *adapter) buildEndpointURL(...)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done in 9eee013 — renamed the receiver to a in all four adapter methods. The targeted tests pass with 100% Matterfull coverage, and go vet is clean.
przemkaczmarek
previously approved these changes
Aug 4, 2026
Code coverage summaryNote:
matterfullRefer here for heat map coverage report |
|
@przemkaczmarek @postindustria-code @hhhjort @linux019 @scr-oath Thank you both for approving the current head. All required checks are passing, and GitHub reports the PR as approved and mergeable, but it is still blocked with nine unresolved review conversations, mostly older non-blocking notes that have already been addressed or acknowledged. Could one of you please help resolve the remaining conversations and move the PR toward merge? Thanks. |
Code coverage summaryNote:
matterfullRefer here for heat map coverage report |
Code coverage summaryNote:
matterfullRefer here for heat map coverage report |
Collaborator
|
@bsardo ready to merge |
|
@bsardo Hi, just following up on this PR. The current head has two approvals, is mergeable, and the required |
foxart
dismissed stale reviews from przemkaczmarek and postindustria-code
via
August 10, 2026 07:31
9eee013
|
@przemkaczmarek @postindustria-code @linux019 @scr-oath @hhhjort @SyntaxNode The receiver rename requested in the latest review is now in 9eee013. This is a mechanical naming-only change; the targeted suite passes, Matterfull remains at 100% coverage, and |
Matterfull
requested review from
linux019,
postindustria-code and
przemkaczmarek
August 10, 2026 07:38
przemkaczmarek
approved these changes
Aug 10, 2026
Code coverage summaryNote:
matterfullRefer here for heat map coverage report |
Code coverage summaryNote:
matterfullRefer here for heat map coverage report |
postindustria-code
approved these changes
Aug 11, 2026
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
13 participants
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.
Docs PR - prebid/prebid.github.io#6042