[ISSUE #1757]📝Update Github workflow action #1758
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request modifies the Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
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? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
|
🔊@RocketmqRustBot 🚀Thanks for your contribution 🎉. CodeRabbit(AI) will review your code first 🔥 |
rocketmq-rust-bot
added
AI review first
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
.github/reviewers.yml (1)
38-38: Consider documenting the rationale for increased reviewer countIncreasing the number of reviewers from 2 to 3 will provide more thorough reviews but might impact PR turnaround time. Consider adding a comment explaining this decision.
# Randomly pick reviewers up to this number. # Do not set this option if you'd like to assign all matching reviewers. + # Increased to 3 reviewers to ensure more thorough code review coverage number_of_reviewers: 3
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/reviewers.yml(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
.github/reviewers.yml (2)
12-13: Verify the existence of new reviewer accounts
The addition of new reviewers is good for improving review coverage. Let's verify these accounts exist and are active.
✅ Verification successful
Both new reviewers are valid and actively contributing
Both GitHub accounts exist and show consistent recent activity:
- TeslaRustor: Active with multiple PR reviews on Dec 12, 2024
- SpaceXCN: Active with multiple PR reviews between Dec 8-11, 2024
Both users demonstrate active participation in code reviews, making them suitable additions as repository reviewers.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that the new GitHub usernames exist and are active
# Expected: Both accounts should exist and show recent activity
for username in "TeslaRustor" "SpaceXCN"; do
echo "Checking $username..."
# Check if user exists and get basic info
gh api -q .login "users/$username" || echo "User $username not found"
# Check recent activity (last 5 events)
gh api "users/$username/events" --jq '.[0:5][] | {created_at: .created_at, type: .type}'
done
Length of output: 1164
Line range hint 1-42: Verify configuration syntax and structure
The overall structure looks good, but let's verify the YAML syntax and required fields.
✅ Verification successful
Configuration structure and syntax verified successfully
The YAML configuration file contains all required top-level sections (reviewers, files, options) and their essential subsections. The structure follows the expected format with proper indentation, and all critical configuration options are present and properly defined:
- Required sections are in place with correct hierarchy
- Reviewers section includes both
defaultsandgroupsconfigurations - Options section contains all necessary settings with valid values
- File patterns are properly defined with associated reviewer assignments
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify YAML syntax and required fields
# Expected: Valid YAML with all required fields present
# Check YAML syntax
cat .github/reviewers.yml | python3 -c 'import sys, yaml; yaml.safe_load(sys.stdin)' || echo "Invalid YAML"
# Verify required fields
cat .github/reviewers.yml | python3 -c '
import sys, yaml
config = yaml.safe_load(sys.stdin)
required = ["reviewers", "files", "options"]
missing = [f for f in required if f not in config]
if missing:
print(f"Missing required fields: {missing}")
'
Length of output: 571
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try using yq instead of python to validate the YAML syntax and structure
# Install yq if not available
type yq >/dev/null 2>&1 || (echo "yq not found" && exit 1)
# Validate YAML syntax
yq eval . .github/reviewers.yml >/dev/null 2>&1 || echo "Invalid YAML syntax"
# Check for required top-level keys
yq eval 'has("reviewers")' .github/reviewers.yml
yq eval 'has("files")' .github/reviewers.yml
yq eval 'has("options")' .github/reviewers.yml
# Verify structure of reviewers section
yq eval '.reviewers | has("defaults")' .github/reviewers.yml
yq eval '.reviewers | has("groups")' .github/reviewers.yml
# Verify structure of options section
yq eval '.options | has("ignore_draft")' .github/reviewers.yml
yq eval '.options | has("number_of_reviewers")' .github/reviewers.yml
Length of output: 1202
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a simpler approach using basic shell commands to verify the structure
# Check if file exists and is readable
if [ ! -r ".github/reviewers.yml" ]; then
echo "File not found or not readable"
exit 1
fi
# Check basic structure using grep
echo "Checking required sections:"
echo "==========================="
grep -E "^reviewers:" .github/reviewers.yml
grep -E "^files:" .github/reviewers.yml
grep -E "^options:" .github/reviewers.yml
echo -e "\nChecking reviewers structure:"
echo "==========================="
grep -E "^\s+defaults:" .github/reviewers.yml
grep -E "^\s+groups:" .github/reviewers.yml
echo -e "\nChecking options structure:"
echo "==========================="
grep -E "^\s+ignore_draft:" .github/reviewers.yml
grep -E "^\s+number_of_reviewers:" .github/reviewers.yml
grep -E "^\s+last_files_match_only:" .github/reviewers.yml
Length of output: 962
🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
[error] 14-14: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1758 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 28.24% 28.24%
=======================================
Files 466 466
Lines 64671 64671
=======================================
Hits 18265 18265
Misses 46406 46406 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Which Issue(s) This PR Fixes(Closes)
Fixes #1757
Brief Description
How Did You Test This Change?
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
TeslaRustorandSpaceXCN, to the repository owners group.Improvements