Skip to content

Conversation

@Tkkg1994
Copy link

@Tkkg1994 Tkkg1994 commented Dec 29, 2025

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores

    • Updated Firebase Functions dependency to v7.0.0
    • Expanded Firebase Functions version compatibility in Nuxt package to include v7.0.0
    • Updated CI workflow to use Java 21
  • Tests

    • Refactored Firestore collection tests for improved test isolation

✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.

@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 29, 2025

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Updates CI workflow to set up Java 21 before the install phase, bumps firebase-functions from version 6 to 7 in functions and nuxt packages, expands nuxt peerDependencies to support firebase-functions 7.0.0, and refactors a collection test to use dynamic references instead of hardcoded names.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
CI Configuration
.github/workflows/ci.yml
Adds setup-java@v4 action to configure Java 21 (Temurin distribution) before the Install phase.
Dependency Updates
functions/package.json
Updates firebase-functions from ^6.0.1 to ^7.0.0.
Dependency Updates
packages/nuxt/package.json
Expands peerDependencies to support firebase-functions ^7.0.0 alongside existing ^4.1.0, ^5.0.0, and ^6.1.2. Updates devDependencies from ^6.1.2 to ^7.0.0.
Test Refactoring
tests/firestore/collection.spec.ts
Skips "rejects on error" test with explanatory comment. Refactors "can be bound to a getter" test to use dynamic collection references (populatedCollectionRef, emptyCollectionRef) instead of hardcoded names, verifying list updates from 2 to 0 items when switching collections.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~12 minutes

Possibly related issues

Poem

🐰 Hop and skip, the deps now bloom,
Java's ready in the room,
Firebase-functions takes a leap,
Seven strong, version bump so steep! 🌟
Tests adapt with dynamic grace.

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Title check ✅ Passed The title 'support firebase-functions 7.x.x' accurately captures the main objective of the changeset, which involves upgrading firebase-functions dependencies across multiple package files to version 7.x.x.
✨ Finishing touches
  • 📝 Generate docstrings

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.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1

📜 Review details

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between fa43df0 and eb1cc9a.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
  • pnpm-lock.yaml is excluded by !**/pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • .github/workflows/ci.yml
  • functions/package.json
  • packages/nuxt/package.json
  • tests/firestore/collection.spec.ts
🔇 Additional comments (4)
packages/nuxt/package.json (1)

49-49: LGTM! Dependency versions updated consistently.

The firebase-functions upgrade is properly reflected in both peerDependencies (supporting v4-v7) and devDependencies (v7.0.0), maintaining backward compatibility while enabling development with the latest version.

Also applies to: 73-73

tests/firestore/collection.spec.ts (1)

405-427: Improved test clarity with explicit collection references.

The refactored test is clearer and more maintainable:

  • Explicitly creates populatedCollectionRef and emptyCollectionRef instead of relying on dynamic names
  • Tests the getter binding by switching collectionRef.value between the two references
  • Verifies that the bound collection updates from 2 items to 0 items

This approach makes the test's intent more obvious and easier to debug.

.github/workflows/ci.yml (1)

31-35: Java 21 is required by firebase-tools v14.19.0 and later.

Firebase-tools v14.19.0 deprecated Java versions below 21 and now requires Java 21 for the emulator. This is a recent change; the emulator previously supported Java 11+. The CI configuration is correct.

functions/package.json (1)

18-18: Verify firebase-functions v7.0.0 compatibility and breaking changes in the codebase.

Version 7.0.0 exists and is stable with no reported critical security advisories. However, significant breaking changes exist that must be addressed:

  • Node.js runtime: Requires Node 18+ (drops Node 16 support)
  • Configuration API: functions.config() removed; migrate to params/secrets API (defineString, defineSecret, defineJsonSecret)
  • Function generation: Prefer 2nd-gen functions (v2) with updated imports from firebase-functions/v2
  • Initialization: Review global state and cold-start assumptions for 2nd-gen lifecycle

Audit the codebase against the official v7 upgrade guide to confirm these breaking changes are properly addressed.

@Tkkg1994 Tkkg1994 changed the title fix(.github/workflows/ci.yml): For testing env we need new java version support firebase-functions 7.x.x Dec 29, 2025
@Tkkg1994
Copy link
Author

@posva
Thanks for all the help, I closed the PR #1647 and now opened this one with the 3 correct commits.

Hopefully this should go through.

Wish you a wonderful rest of the 2025!

@Tkkg1994
Copy link
Author

Fixes #1646

@pkg-pr-new
Copy link

pkg-pr-new bot commented Dec 29, 2025

Open in StackBlitz

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/vuefire@1648

commit: eb1cc9a

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 29, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 62.90%. Comparing base (ed3d5d8) to head (eb1cc9a).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1648   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   62.90%   62.90%           
=======================================
  Files          28       28           
  Lines        1903     1903           
  Branches      264      264           
=======================================
  Hits         1197     1197           
  Misses        706      706           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@posva
Copy link
Member

posva commented Dec 29, 2025

Thanks a lot!

Now you should be able to see a published version at https://github.com/vuejs/vuefire/actions/runs/20583068403/job/59115705184?pr=1648 and in a comment here

I don't know when this will go forward, I still have to check with firebase and unfortunately, I currently have a lot of other pressing matters, so it will be probably months before I can merge this. Until that, you can use this PR's version

@Tkkg1994
Copy link
Author

Tkkg1994 commented Dec 29, 2025

Perfect, this looks really nice @posva

Anything I can do to speed the process up? I have hoped to be able to install an official version soon. I can also be helpful to assist as I have a personal interest and maybe some more time than you 😄

Greetings

Edit: and I would need the nuxt-module, so nuxt-vuefire

Copy link
Member

posva commented Dec 30, 2025

Nothing you can do on your side, thanks!
Send another PR and mention me so I can approve the workflow and it publishes

@Tkkg1994
Copy link
Author

Thank you for the answer @posva

As far as I can see I already included the correct changes here in 9f06992#diff-36b207d79434b922b863a3e8d4ca66d566cf0044d5f4d0943b208f7c19722dc2

So basically we should be able to build this without any further PR

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants