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

🔨 add elm package ecosystem for review #333

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 15, 2025
Merged

Conversation

ccamel
Copy link
Owner

@ccamel ccamel commented Jan 15, 2025

Self explanatory.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Enhanced dependency management configuration for Elm packages
    • Added a new Dependabot configuration for the /review directory
    • Maintained existing dependency update settings

@ccamel ccamel self-assigned this Jan 15, 2025
Copy link

vercel bot commented Jan 15, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
playground-elm ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Jan 15, 2025 9:14am

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 15, 2025

Important

Review skipped

Auto incremental reviews are disabled on this repository.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Walkthrough

The pull request modifies the .github/dependabot.yml configuration by adding a second entry for the Elm package ecosystem. This new configuration targets the /review directory while maintaining the same parameters as the existing Elm entry, such as daily update schedule and a limit of 10 open pull requests. The change essentially creates a parallel dependency update configuration for a specific subdirectory within the project.

Changes

File Change Summary
.github/dependabot.yml Added a new configuration block for Elm package ecosystem targeting /review directory

Possibly related PRs


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?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a 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

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
.github/dependabot.yml (1)

15-26: Consider reducing configuration duplication.

The new Elm configuration block duplicates most settings from the root Elm configuration. Consider extracting common settings using YAML anchors and aliases to improve maintainability.

Here's how you could refactor it:

version: 2
updates:
+ elm_defaults: &elm_defaults
+   schedule:
+     interval: daily
+   open-pull-requests-limit: 10
+   assignees:
+     - ccamel
+   reviewers:
+     - ccamel
+   commit-message:
+     prefix: ":arrow_up:"
+
  - package-ecosystem: elm
    directory: "/"
-   schedule:
-     interval: daily
-   open-pull-requests-limit: 10
-   assignees:
-     - ccamel
-   reviewers:
-     - ccamel
-   commit-message:
-     prefix: ":arrow_up:"
+   <<: *elm_defaults

  - package-ecosystem: elm
    directory: "/review"
-   schedule:
-     interval: daily
-   open-pull-requests-limit: 10
-   assignees:
-     - ccamel
-   reviewers:
-     - ccamel
-   commit-message:
-     prefix: ":arrow_up:"
+   <<: *elm_defaults
📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 74e9eae and 53646cc.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .github/dependabot.yml (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
.github/dependabot.yml (1)

15-26: Verify the Elm review setup.

Let's ensure the /review directory is properly configured for Elm review packages.

✅ Verification successful

Elm review setup is correctly configured

The /review directory follows the standard Elm review structure with the necessary configuration files (elm.json and src/ReviewConfig.elm). The separate Dependabot configuration is appropriate as review packages should be managed independently from the main application dependencies.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the Elm review configuration setup

# Check if review directory exists and contains expected files
echo "Checking review directory structure..."
if [ -d "review" ]; then
    echo "Found /review directory"
    fd . review -t f -e json -e elm
else
    echo "Warning: /review directory not found"
fi

# Look for common Elm review configuration patterns
echo -e "\nChecking for Elm review configuration..."
rg -l "module ReviewConfig" review/

Length of output: 404

@ccamel ccamel force-pushed the ci/dependabot-elm-review branch from 19f29bb to 357a5ac Compare January 15, 2025 09:14
@ccamel ccamel merged commit 69bef3a into main Jan 15, 2025
12 checks passed
@ccamel ccamel deleted the ci/dependabot-elm-review branch January 15, 2025 09:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant