-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 48
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
fix types action (test) #879
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces updates to a GitHub Actions workflow file to enhance the version tagging process. Key modifications include changing job permissions to allow writing tags, renaming steps for improved clarity, and adding steps for installing dependencies and generating bindings. The logic for retrieving the latest tag has been refined with better error handling, and the version update logic has been expanded to determine the type of version bump based on commit messages and branch names. Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Warning Rate limit exceeded@0xDEnYO has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 10 minutes and 13 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. 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 (
|
Test Coverage ReportLine Coverage: 76.10% (1675 / 2201 lines) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
.github/workflows/types.yaml (1)
32-34
: Consider using LTS version notation for Node.js.While pinning to version 20 is good, consider using the more specific LTS version notation (e.g., '20.x') to ensure you're getting security updates while maintaining stability.
- node-version: 20 + node-version: 20.x
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/workflows/types.yaml
(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
.github/workflows/types.yaml
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2162:info:10:11: read without -r will mangle backslashes
(shellcheck)
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2046:warning:16:13: Quote this to prevent word splitting
(shellcheck)
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:27:34: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
108-108: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:37:36: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
154-154: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:16:22: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
.github/workflows/types.yaml (1)
13-13
: LGTM: Explicit permission declaration with clear documentation.
The write permission for contents is correctly specified and well-documented with its purpose.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
.github/workflows_deactivated/types.oldVersion.yml (1)
1-1
: Consider removing or documenting deprecated workflowThis workflow file is in a
workflows_deactivated
directory and marked asoldVersion
, suggesting it's deprecated. To prevent confusion:
- If it's truly deprecated, consider removing it
- If it's kept for reference, add documentation explaining why it's kept and how it differs from the current version
.github/workflows/types.yaml (1)
130-131
: Add version validation before parsingThe version parsing happens before validating the version format. Consider moving the validation before parsing to prevent potential errors.
+ # Validate current version format + if [[ ! "$CURRENT_VERSION" =~ ^[0-9]+\.[0-9]+\.[0-9]+(-beta)?$ ]]; then + echo "ERROR: Invalid version format: $CURRENT_VERSION" + exit 1 + fi IFS='.' read -r MAJOR MINOR PATCH <<< "${CURRENT_VERSION//[^0-9.]/}"
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
.github/workflows/types.yaml
(1 hunks).github/workflows_deactivated/types.oldVersion.yml
(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (1)
.github/workflows/types.yaml (1)
Learnt from: 0xDEnYO
PR: lifinance/contracts#879
File: .github/workflows/types.yaml:58-62
Timestamp: 2024-11-27T04:28:26.318Z
Learning: In the file `.github/workflows/types.yaml`, additional error handling for file operations is not required in the 'Copy Type Bindings and ABI' step.
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
.github/workflows/types.yaml
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2162:info:10:11: read without -r will mangle backslashes
(shellcheck)
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2046:warning:16:13: Quote this to prevent word splitting
(shellcheck)
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:33:34: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
114-114: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:35:36: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
158-158: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:16:22: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
🔇 Additional comments (5)
.github/workflows/types.yaml (5)
13-13
: LGTM: Permission change is appropriate
The write permission for contents is correctly set and necessary for pushing new tags to the repository.
16-45
: LGTM: Well-structured setup sequence
The setup steps are logically ordered, use pinned action versions, and have clear descriptive names. The sequence properly handles all dependencies from Foundry setup through TypeScript binding generation.
48-62
: LGTM: Repository operations are appropriate
The repository checkout and file operations are correctly implemented. As per previous discussion, the current implementation of file operations works as intended.
64-65
: LGTM: Build step is straightforward
The build step correctly handles the dependency installation and build process for the contract types.
81-81
:
Fix shell script read command
The read
command should use the -r
flag to prevent backslash mangling.
- while read ITEM; do
+ while read -r ITEM; do
Likely invalid or redundant comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
.github/workflows/types.yaml (1)
Line range hint
1-172
: Consider adding workflow robustness improvements.While the workflow is well-structured, consider these improvements for better operational reliability:
- Add timeout-minutes to the job to prevent hanging
- Consider adding retry logic for network-dependent steps (e.g., curl, git push)
- Add status checks before critical operations to ensure repository state is as expected
Example addition for the job:
generate-tag: runs-on: ubuntu-latest timeout-minutes: 10 # Prevent hanging jobs🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2162:info:10:11: read without -r will mangle backslashes
(shellcheck)
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2046:warning:16:13: Quote this to prevent word splitting
(shellcheck)
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:33:34: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
114-114: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:35:36: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
158-158: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:16:22: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/workflows/types.yaml
(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (1)
.github/workflows/types.yaml (1)
Learnt from: 0xDEnYO
PR: lifinance/contracts#879
File: .github/workflows/types.yaml:58-62
Timestamp: 2024-11-27T04:28:26.318Z
Learning: In the file `.github/workflows/types.yaml`, additional error handling for file operations is not required in the 'Copy Type Bindings and ABI' step.
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
.github/workflows/types.yaml
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2162:info:10:11: read without -r will mangle backslashes
(shellcheck)
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2046:warning:16:13: Quote this to prevent word splitting
(shellcheck)
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:33:34: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
114-114: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:35:36: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
158-158: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:16:22: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
🔇 Additional comments (5)
.github/workflows/types.yaml (5)
13-13
: LGTM! Required permission added for tag management.
The addition of write permissions for contents is necessary for pushing new tags.
16-37
: LGTM! Well-structured setup with pinned action versions.
The setup steps are clearly organized with descriptive names and use specific versions for actions, which is a good practice for stability.
81-87
: Fix shell script issues in beta version handling.
The read
command should use the -r
flag to prevent backslash mangling.
- while read ITEM; do
+ while read -r ITEM; do
97-101
: LGTM! Robust version format validation added.
The semver format validation is a good addition that will prevent issues with invalid version formats.
170-172
: LGTM! Tag creation and pushing logic.
The tag creation and pushing logic is functional and handles both main branch and feature branch scenarios appropriately.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
.github/workflows/types.yaml (1)
30-37
: Consider adding caching for Node.js dependencies.Adding caching for Node.js dependencies could significantly improve workflow execution time.
Add these steps before installing dependencies:
- name: Cache Node.js dependencies uses: actions/cache@v3 with: path: | node_modules */*/node_modules key: ${{ runner.os }}-yarn-${{ hashFiles('**/yarn.lock') }} restore-keys: | ${{ runner.os }}-yarn-
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/workflows/types.yaml
(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (1)
.github/workflows/types.yaml (1)
Learnt from: 0xDEnYO
PR: lifinance/contracts#879
File: .github/workflows/types.yaml:58-62
Timestamp: 2024-11-27T04:28:26.318Z
Learning: In the file `.github/workflows/types.yaml`, additional error handling for file operations is not required in the 'Copy Type Bindings and ABI' step.
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
.github/workflows/types.yaml
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2162:info:10:11: read without -r will mangle backslashes
(shellcheck)
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2046:warning:16:13: Quote this to prevent word splitting
(shellcheck)
71-71: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:33:34: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
114-114: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:40:36: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
163-163: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:16:22: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
🔇 Additional comments (6)
.github/workflows/types.yaml (6)
13-13
: LGTM: Required permission for tag management.
The write permission for contents is necessary to push new tags to the repository.
16-45
: LGTM: Well-structured setup with pinned action versions.
The setup steps are logically ordered and use specific versions of actions, which is good for reproducibility.
48-62
: LGTM: Repository setup and file operations.
The repository checkout and file operations are correctly configured.
106-151
: LGTM: Robust version update logic.
The version increment logic properly handles different scenarios:
- Major version for "major" in commit message
- Minor version for "feat" in commit message
- Patch version for other changes
- Beta version for non-main branches
🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
114-114: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:40:36: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
156-177
: LGTM: Version update and tag push logic.
The git configuration and version update process are properly implemented.
🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
163-163: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:16:22: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
81-87
:
Fix shell script issues in beta version handling.
The read
command should use the -r
flag to prevent backslash mangling.
- while read ITEM; do
+ while read -r ITEM; do
Likely invalid or redundant comment.
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!!!)