New Adapter: RocketLab

[leamarty]

DOC - prebid/prebid.github.io#6099

[github-actions]

Code coverage summary

Note:

• Prebid team doesn't anticipate tests covering code paths that might result in marshal and unmarshal errors
• Coverage summary encompasses all commits leading up to the latest one, a13636e

rocketlab

Refer here for heat map coverage report

github.com/prebid/prebid-server/v3/adapters/rocketlab/rocketlab.go:29:	Builder		100.0%
github.com/prebid/prebid-server/v3/adapters/rocketlab/rocketlab.go:36:	MakeRequests	86.7%
github.com/prebid/prebid-server/v3/adapters/rocketlab/rocketlab.go:86:	makeRequest	85.7%
github.com/prebid/prebid-server/v3/adapters/rocketlab/rocketlab.go:104:	MakeBids	100.0%
github.com/prebid/prebid-server/v3/adapters/rocketlab/rocketlab.go:140:	getBidType	100.0%
total:									(statements)	91.9%

[SyntaxNode]

I have concerns over the implementation of this adapter. Thank you for starting a separate discussion.

[leamarty]

Will appreciate some help in here @bsardo , I believe the failed GithubAction isn't related to my code/changes, right?

[leamarty]

Once again, this looks ready to be merged

[leamarty]

Hi there @bsardo ! Sorry to bother you, I just wanted to know if there's anything else I can do here to push this (since the Prebid.JS adapter was already merged and released successfully.

I also have the PR to udpate the docs ready once we merge this.

Thank you!

[leamarty]

Hey there @VeronikaSolovei9 sorry to bother you too. Is there anything else I might be missing here to get an approval? It's been 2 weeks already...

[bsardo]

Hi @leamarty, thanks for your patience. We have quite a large backlog of PR reviews to work through. We'll get to this shortly.

[leamarty]

Thanks for the update @bsardo ! Will wait then

[leamarty]

Hey @bsardo hope you are doing well. I made sure not to bother you for a while so you could take your time and review this PR. But we are now reaching 1 MONTH of this PR open, and we can't wait any longer. Please let me know if there's anything else you need from my side. Thank you

[leamarty]

@VeronikaSolovei9 ?

[leamarty]

Hi @bsardo @ccorbo @hhhjort ,
Do you know if we are planned to be included in the next release version?
Do you have an approximative ETA for the release of this adapter?
Thanks

[leamarty]

Hi there @MaksymTeqBlaze , hope you can take a look at this soon... we've submited it ages ago 😓

Please let me know if there's anything I can do to speed it up.

[MaksymTeqBlaze]

Endpoint is not reachable:
curl -i --location --request POST https://traffic.rocketlab.ai/pserver
curl: (6) Could not resolve host: traffic.rocketlab.ai

[github-actions]

Code coverage summary

Note:

• Prebid team doesn't anticipate tests covering code paths that might result in marshal and unmarshal errors
• Coverage summary encompasses all commits leading up to the latest one, a5bc576

rocketlab

Refer here for heat map coverage report

github.com/prebid/prebid-server/v3/adapters/rocketlab/rocketlab.go:29:	Builder		100.0%
github.com/prebid/prebid-server/v3/adapters/rocketlab/rocketlab.go:36:	MakeRequests	86.7%
github.com/prebid/prebid-server/v3/adapters/rocketlab/rocketlab.go:86:	makeRequest	85.7%
github.com/prebid/prebid-server/v3/adapters/rocketlab/rocketlab.go:104:	MakeBids	100.0%
github.com/prebid/prebid-server/v3/adapters/rocketlab/rocketlab.go:140:	getBidType	100.0%
total:									(statements)	91.9%

[MaksymTeqBlaze]

New endpoint is reachable:
curl -i --location --request POST https://traffic1.rocketlab.ai/pserver
HTTP/1.1 204 No Content

[leamarty]

@MaksymTeqBlaze I was literally fixing the typo in the endpoint as you were commenting. Should be fine now

[MaksymTeqBlaze]

sent a verification email. Please respond

verified*

[leamarty]

Done

[leamarty]

@bsardo yes it is, that's why @MaksymTeqBlaze was brought to this conversation. It's a quick one

[bsardo]

@leamarty, Prebid requires white labels be created using aliases rather than copying adapter code as it saves a lot of upfront and maintenance engineering time.
Creating a ‘hardcoded’ alias in Go is simple, see Aliasing an Adapter. By default, your alias will inherit all of the properties defined in the YAML file of the adapter you are creating an alias of. If you wish to override any of the inherited properties, add the corresponding property to your alias YAML file.

[leamarty]

@bsardo I understand, but considering that we've been waiting over 45 days for this to get reviewed, I believe it would only be fair to get this released and then refactor it to get it compliant.

We are literally loosing business time, money, and opportunities because of the delay here. I'm not blaiming anyone, I understand there's time issues and tight schedules. But I believe this would be a fair thing to do, and I'd urge you to please reconsider the procedure here.

[leamarty]

@bsardo I took the time to dig into this, and the short answer is: we can't do the alias.

Why? Because the provider that's the base for our adapter doesn't actually have their own. I hope I'm explaining properly, but there's no adapter from where to create the alias.

And I guess you'll also understand that we can't just alias another "similar" adapter (like, another one from the same white-label provider as us) because they may do any updates whenever they want (and they should be able to) and potentially break our operation.

I truly took the time to dig into this, analyze it, and try to do it. Hope you'll understand, and please help us move this forward.

[leamarty]

@bsardo Happy Monday! I was wondering if you were able to look into our situation. Thank you in advance.

[leamarty]

@VeronikaSolovei9 @bsardo Need another look here please 🙏🏻

[leamarty]

@bsardo would truly appreciate an answer here. Thank you 🙏🏻

[leamarty]

@MaksymTeqBlaze @VeronikaSolovei9 @bsardo

It's honestly quite sad how all this has been (not)evolving.

We've done everything by the book. Everything that was documented and everything we've been asked for, we've completed. Now we don't know where to go from here.

I have no idea what "internal affairs" or "bureaucracy" is going on in Prebid's Organization, but I don't think that the community or end-customers have to pay for that.

Please, please help me merge this PR that is fully working and ready to go to production 🙏🏻

[bsardo]

@leamarty sorry for the slow response. We are quite overwhelmed. Prebid leadership has discussed this topic and taken a hard stance on this resulting in a recently merged PR that will now allow white labeling solutions to create an adapter that does not bid but can be aliased. This was essential as our resources are limited. Future white labels can be created and reviewed quickly and this significantly reduces maintenance. As mentioned earlier, you should create an alias. As I understand it, TeqBlaze is your provider right? I just merged their adapter so you can now alias it. It should require nothing more than a 10-20 line YAML file from you.

[leamarty]

@bsardo YAML file done, please let me know if there's anything else we need to do

[bsardo]

Endpoint is reachable

curl -i --location --request POST https://traffic1.rocketlab.ai/pserver
HTTP/1.1 204 No Content
Server: nginx
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2025 19:50:03 GMT
Connection: keep-alive
Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *
Access-Control-Allow-Credentials: true

[bsardo]

Email address has been verified as reachable.

[bsardo]

User sync verified redirecting to setuid endpoint with rocketlab cookie uid set.

[leamarty]

Thanks @bsardo . Added the docs PR: prebid/prebid.github.io#6105