Skip to content

[pull] main from MetaMask:main#536

Merged
pull[bot] merged 3 commits intoReality2byte:mainfrom
MetaMask:main
Apr 24, 2026
Merged

[pull] main from MetaMask:main#536
pull[bot] merged 3 commits intoReality2byte:mainfrom
MetaMask:main

Conversation

@pull
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@pull pull Bot commented Apr 24, 2026

See Commits and Changes for more details.


Created by pull[bot] (v2.0.0-alpha.4)

Can you help keep this open source service alive? 💖 Please sponsor : )

matthewwalsh0 and others added 3 commits April 24, 2026 11:38
…r types are applied (#8546)

## Explanation

Snapshot `txParamsOriginal` in `updateEditableParams` when
`containerTypes` are first applied, so consumers have a reference to the
pre-wrap transaction parameters.

## References

- MetaMask/metamask-extension#42002

## Checklist

- [x] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate
- [x] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or
updated code as appropriate
- [x] I've highlighted breaking changes using the "BREAKING" category
above as appropriate

<!-- CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
---

> [!NOTE]
> **Low Risk**
> Low risk: adds a guarded metadata snapshot when `containerTypes` are
first set, with tests covering non-application and non-overwrite cases.
> 
> **Overview**
> When `updateEditableParams` applies `containerTypes` for the first
time, it now snapshots the pre-wrap `txParams` into `txParamsOriginal`
(without overwriting an existing snapshot).
> 
> Adds unit tests covering snapshot creation only on first wrap, no
snapshot when `containerTypes` isn’t provided or already set, and
preserving an existing `txParamsOriginal`; updates the changelog
accordingly.
> 
> <sup>Reviewed by [Cursor Bugbot](https://cursor.com/bugbot) for commit
2198ab0. Bugbot is set up for automated
code reviews on this repo. Configure
[here](https://www.cursor.com/dashboard/bugbot).</sup>
<!-- /CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
## Explanation

Add profileId to position response.

<!--
Thanks for your contribution! Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?
* Are there any changes whose purpose might not obvious to those
unfamiliar with the domain?
* If your primary goal was to update one package but you found you had
to update another one along the way, why did you do so?
* If you had to upgrade a dependency, why did you do so?
-->

## References

<!--
Are there any issues that this pull request is tied to?
Are there other links that reviewers should consult to understand these
changes better?
Are there client or consumer pull requests to adopt any breaking
changes?

For example:

* Fixes #12345
* Related to #67890
-->

## Checklist

- [x] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate
- [ ] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or
updated code as appropriate
- [x] I've communicated my changes to consumers by [updating changelogs
for packages I've
changed](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/tree/main/docs/processes/updating-changelogs.md)
- [ ] I've introduced [breaking
changes](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/tree/main/docs/processes/breaking-changes.md)
in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and
consumer packages to resolve them

<!-- CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
---

> [!NOTE]
> **Low Risk**
> Low risk: this is a type/response-validation schema expansion for
positions plus test fixture updates, with no behavioral or endpoint
changes. Main risk is consumers now needing to include `positionId` in
mocked/expected position payloads to pass validation.
> 
> **Overview**
> Positions returned by `SocialService` now require a new `positionId`
field via updates to the `Position` type and the `PositionStruct`
superstruct schema.
> 
> Tests and the package changelog are updated accordingly to reflect and
validate the new field.
> 
> <sup>Reviewed by [Cursor Bugbot](https://cursor.com/bugbot) for commit
27e303a. Bugbot is set up for automated
code reviews on this repo. Configure
[here](https://www.cursor.com/dashboard/bugbot).</sup>
<!-- /CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
## Explanation

This will release the latest social-controller version.

## References

<!--
Are there any issues that this pull request is tied to?
Are there other links that reviewers should consult to understand these
changes better?
Are there client or consumer pull requests to adopt any breaking
changes?

For example:

* Fixes #12345
* Related to #67890
-->

## Checklist

- [x] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate
- [x] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or
updated code as appropriate
- [x] I've communicated my changes to consumers by [updating changelogs
for packages I've
changed](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/tree/main/docs/processes/updating-changelogs.md)
- [ ] I've introduced [breaking
changes](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/tree/main/docs/processes/breaking-changes.md)
in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and
consumer packages to resolve them

<!-- CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
---

> [!NOTE]
> **Low Risk**
> Low risk: this PR only updates package versions and the
`@metamask/social-controllers` changelog, with no runtime code changes.
> 
> **Overview**
> Publishes a new release by bumping the root monorepo version to
`935.0.0` and `@metamask/social-controllers` to `2.1.0`.
> 
> Updates `packages/social-controllers/CHANGELOG.md` with a `2.1.0`
entry and adjusts the compare links to start tracking changes from this
new tag.
> 
> <sup>Reviewed by [Cursor Bugbot](https://cursor.com/bugbot) for commit
7e80c49. Bugbot is set up for automated
code reviews on this repo. Configure
[here](https://www.cursor.com/dashboard/bugbot).</sup>
<!-- /CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
@pull pull Bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 24, 2026
@pull pull Bot added the ⤵️ pull label Apr 24, 2026
@pull pull Bot merged commit 5a3fa25 into Reality2byte:main Apr 24, 2026
0 of 6 checks passed
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants