bump version of failing git action #871
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request modifies the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
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
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![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 (4)
.github/workflows/types.yaml (4)
Line range hint
9-12: Consider restricting permissions furtherThe workflow currently requests
contents: readpermissions. Following the principle of least privilege, we should explicitly declare all required permissions.Consider adding explicit permissions for other operations:
permissions: contents: read + packages: read # If accessing GitHub packages + actions: read # For checking action versions
Line range hint
114-115: Enhance commit message sanitizationThe current sanitization only removes single quotes, which might not be sufficient for preventing shell injection.
Consider using a more robust sanitization approach:
-COMMIT_MSG=$(echo "$MESSAGE" | sed "s/'//g") +COMMIT_MSG=$(echo "$MESSAGE" | tr -cd '[:alnum:][:space:]-._')
Line range hint
94-96: Consider making version fragment logic more maintainableThe current inline ternary expression for version fragment is complex and hard to maintain.
Consider extracting this logic to a separate step:
- name: Determine version fragment id: version_fragment run: | if [[ "$BRANCH_NAME" != "main" ]]; then echo "fragment=beta" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT exit 0 fi if [[ "$MESSAGE" == *"major"* ]]; then echo "fragment=major" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT elif [[ "$MESSAGE" == *"feat"* ]]; then echo "fragment=feature" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT else echo "fragment=bug" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT fi - name: Update version uses: christian-draeger/[email protected] with: current-version: '${{ env.LATEST_TAG }}' version-fragment: ${{ steps.version_fragment.outputs.fragment }}
Line range hint
119-122: Consider adding error handling for git operationsThe git push operations lack error handling and validation.
Add error checking and handling:
+set -e # Exit on error + if [[ "$BRANCH_NAME" == "main" ]]; then - git push -u origin $BRANCH_NAME + if ! git push -u origin $BRANCH_NAME; then + echo "Failed to push to main branch" + exit 1 + fi fi
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/workflows/types.yaml(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
.github/workflows/types.yaml (1)
92-92: Verify the changelog for [email protected]
While upgrading to a newer version is good, let's ensure there are no breaking changes or known issues.
✅ Verification successful
Version upgrade to [email protected] is safe to proceed
The version upgrade from 1.1.0 to 1.2.0 is safe as:
- It's the latest stable release (1.2.0)
- The changelog shows a non-breaking enhancement that removes Docker dependency
- The change improves platform support without modifying core functionality
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check the release notes and latest version of the action
# Fetch release information for the action
gh api repos/christian-draeger/increment-semantic-version/releases | jq -r '.[0] | {tag_name, body}'
# Check if this version is the latest stable
gh api repos/christian-draeger/increment-semantic-version/tags | jq -r '.[0].name'
Length of output: 665
Test Coverage ReportLine Coverage: 76.10% (1675 / 2201 lines) |
Which Jira task belongs to this PR?
Why did I implement it this way?
Checklist before requesting a review
Checklist for reviewer (DO NOT DEPLOY and contracts BEFORE CHECKING THIS!!!)