Skip to content

chore: replace deprecated gemini_3_pro with gemini_3.1_pro#157

Merged
faygade merged 1 commit intomainfrom
gemini3pro-deprecation
Apr 3, 2026
Merged

chore: replace deprecated gemini_3_pro with gemini_3.1_pro#157
faygade merged 1 commit intomainfrom
gemini3pro-deprecation

Conversation

@faygade
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@faygade faygade commented Apr 2, 2026

Summary

  • Replace deprecated gemini_3_pro model identifier with gemini_3.1_pro in InvokeLLMParams type and JSDoc

Test plan

  • Verify TypeScript compiles without errors
  • Confirm downstream consumers using gemini_3_pro update to gemini_3.1_pro

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@claude
Copy link
Copy Markdown

claude Bot commented Apr 2, 2026

Claude finished @faygade's task —— View job


PR Review: Replace deprecated gemini_3_pro with gemini_3.1_pro

Summary

This PR updates the deprecated gemini_3_pro model identifier to gemini_3.1_pro in the InvokeLLMParams interface. The change is minimal and focused, updating only the necessary lines in the type definition and corresponding JSDoc comment.

Review Findings

Code Quality and Best Practices

  • Clean change: The PR makes a focused, single-purpose change
  • Consistent naming: The new model name follows the existing naming convention (gemini_3.1_pro aligns with the dot notation versioning pattern)
  • Documentation updated: Both the TypeScript type and JSDoc comment are updated in sync

Potential Bugs or Issues

  • No bugs identified: The change is straightforward type replacement
  • Type safety maintained: The string literal union type ensures compile-time checking for valid model names
  • Scope verification: Confirmed that gemini_3_pro only appears in this single location in the codebase (src/modules/integrations.types.ts:51,53)

Performance Considerations

  • No performance impact: This is purely a type definition change with no runtime implications

Security Concerns

  • No security issues: Model identifier changes don't introduce any security vulnerabilities
  • Type safety preserved: The strict typing prevents accidental use of invalid model names

⚠️ Test Coverage

While the change itself is low-risk, the test plan could be more comprehensive:

Current test plan:

  • ✅ Verify TypeScript compiles without errors
  • ✅ Confirm downstream consumers update to gemini_3.1_pro

Recommended additions:

  1. Integration tests: Run existing integration tests to ensure the new model identifier works with the Base44 API
  2. Migration guide: Consider adding a note in the changelog or release notes about this breaking change for consumers using the deprecated model
  3. Deprecation timeline: Document when gemini_3_pro was deprecated and when support will end

Recommendations

  1. Version bump: This is technically a breaking change for any code using 'gemini_3_pro' as a literal. Consider if this warrants a minor version bump (0.9.0) rather than a patch version.
  2. Changelog entry: Add an entry noting the deprecation and migration path
  3. Runtime validation: Consider adding runtime warnings if the deprecated model is somehow still used (though TypeScript should prevent this at compile time)

Conclusion

This is a well-executed deprecation update. The change is minimal, focused, and maintains type safety. Approval recommended with the minor suggestions for enhanced documentation and testing.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown

github-actions Bot commented Apr 2, 2026

🚀 Package Preview Available!


Install this PR's preview build with npm:

npm i @base44-preview/sdk@0.8.24-pr.157.c9c7b51

Prefer not to change any import paths? Install using npm alias so your code still imports @base44/sdk:

npm i "@base44/sdk@npm:@base44-preview/sdk@0.8.24-pr.157.c9c7b51"

Or add it to your package.json dependencies:

{
  "dependencies": {
    "@base44/sdk": "npm:@base44-preview/sdk@0.8.24-pr.157.c9c7b51"
  }
}

Preview published to npm registry — try new features instantly!

@faygade faygade merged commit 35d3341 into main Apr 3, 2026
6 checks passed
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