Upgraded the nodemailer package to 6.9.15

[syedali237]

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

Upgrade (Upgraded the nodemailer package to version 6.9.15.)

Issue Number:

Fixes #2539

Did you add tests for your changes?

No

Snapshots/Videos:

Not Apllicable

If relevant, did you update the documentation?

No

Summary

The package could not be removed as it's used by multiple files, and removing it caused test failures.

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

No

Other information

N/A

Have you read the contributing guide?

Yes

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Updated the nodemailer package to the latest patch version, which may include bug fixes and minor improvements.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The pull request updates the nodemailer package version in the package.json file from ^6.9.14 to ^6.9.15. This change reflects a patch version increment, indicating that the new version may include bug fixes and minor improvements. The update is part of an effort to ensure the codebase remains current with dependency requirements.

Changes

Files	Change Summary
package.json	Updated nodemailer version from ^6.9.14 to ^6.9.15

Assessment against linked issues

Objective	Addressed	Explanation
Upgrade the package nodemailer from 6.9.14 to 6.9.15 (#2539)	✅
Remove the package if it is unused or unnecessary (#2539)	❌	No assessment of package usage was performed.

Poem

🐇 In the garden where the bunnies play,
A package update brightens the day!
Nodemailer hops to a new version's cheer,
Fixing bugs, bringing joy far and near.
With each little change, our code does thrive,
Thank you, dear developers, for keeping it alive! 🌼

---

Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 2683bbf and fcf18f5.

Files ignored due to path filters (1)

• package-lock.json is excluded by !**/package-lock.json

Files selected for processing (1)

• package.json (1 hunks)

Additional comments not posted (1)

package.json (1)

94-94: LGTM! Nodemailer package successfully updated.

The update of the nodemailer package from version ^6.9.14 to ^6.9.15 has been correctly implemented in the package.json file. This change aligns with the PR objectives and addresses the linked issue #2539.

To ensure the update doesn't introduce any unexpected issues, please run the following verification steps:

1. Update the project's dependencies:

2. Check for any breaking changes or deprecations:

3. Run the project's test suite:

4. If there are any files specifically using nodemailer, review them for potential impacts:

These steps will help verify that the update doesn't negatively impact the project's functionality.

---

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.

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.

[github-actions]

Our Pull Request Approval Process

We have these basic policies to make the approval process smoother for our volunteer team.

Testing Your Code

Please make sure your code passes all tests. Our test code coverage system will fail if these conditions occur:

1. The overall code coverage drops below the target threshold of the repository
2. Any file in the pull request has code coverage levels below the repository threshold
3. Merge conflicts

The process helps maintain the overall reliability of the code base and is a prerequisite for getting your PR approved. Assigned reviewers regularly review the PR queue and tend to focus on PRs that are passing.

Reviewers

Do not assign reviewers. Our Queue Monitors will review your PR and assign them.
When your PR has been assigned reviewers contact them to get your code reviewed and approved via:

1. comments in this PR or
2. our slack channel

Reviewing Your Code

Your reviewer(s) will have the following roles:

1. arbitrators of future discussions with other contributors about the validity of your changes
2. point of contact for evaluating the validity of your work
3. person who verifies matching issues by others that should be closed.
4. person who gives general guidance in fixing your tests

CONTRIBUTING.md

Read our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:

1. PRs with issues not assigned to you will be closed by the reviewer
2. Fix the first comment in the PR so that each issue listed automatically closes

Other

1. 🎯 Please be considerate of our volunteers' time. Contacting the person who assigned the reviewers is not advised unless they ask for your input. Do not @ the person who did the assignment otherwise.
2. Read the CONTRIBUTING.md file make

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 98.77%. Comparing base (2683bbf) to head (fcf18f5).
Report is 4 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #2549   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    98.77%   98.77%           
========================================
  Files          355      355           
  Lines        17992    17992           
  Branches      2400     2400           
========================================
  Hits         17772    17772           
  Misses         220      220           

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

[syedali237]

@palisadoes Can you please review this PR?