Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Prebid Targeting: add a configurable "bidCacheFilterFunction" (#7993) #7997

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 3, 2022

Conversation

harpere
Copy link
Collaborator

@harpere harpere commented Feb 2, 2022

cherry-picked the change from PR #7993 to this 5.20.x-legacy branch.

  • add a configurable "bidCacheFilterFunction" to determine whether to use a cached bid

  • tiny != changed to !==

Co-authored-by: Eric Harper [email protected]

Type of change

  • Bugfix
  • Feature
  • New bidder adapter
  • Code style update (formatting, local variables)
  • Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes)
  • Build related changes
  • CI related changes
  • Does this change affect user-facing APIs or examples documented on http://prebid.org?
  • Other

Description of change

  • test parameters for validating bids
{
  bidder: '<bidder name>',
  params: {
    // ...
  }
}
  • contact email of the adapter’s maintainer
  • official adapter submission

For any changes that affect user-facing APIs or example code documented on http://prebid.org, please provide:

Other information

* add a configurable "bidCacheFilterFunction" to determine whether to use a cached bid

* tiny != changed to !==

Co-authored-by: Eric Harper <[email protected]>
@ChrisHuie ChrisHuie changed the title add a configurable "bidCacheFilterFunction" (#7993) Prebid Targeting: add a configurable "bidCacheFilterFunction" (#7993) Feb 3, 2022
@ChrisHuie ChrisHuie merged commit b4df57c into 5.20.x-legacy Feb 3, 2022
@ChrisHuie ChrisHuie deleted the 5.20.x-bidCacheFilterFunction branch February 3, 2022 16:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants