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

ci: publish to npm workflow #456

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 31, 2025
Merged

ci: publish to npm workflow #456

merged 1 commit into from
Jan 31, 2025

Conversation

fadeev
Copy link
Member

@fadeev fadeev commented Jan 31, 2025

Publish to npm when making a GitHub release.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Updated GitHub workflow for NPM publishing
    • Modified workflow trigger from manual dispatch to automatic release event
    • Streamlined version and tag determination process for NPM package publishing

@fadeev fadeev requested review from a team as code owners January 31, 2025 08:18
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 31, 2025

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The pull request modifies the GitHub Actions workflow for publishing to NPM. The workflow now triggers automatically on release publication instead of manual dispatch. The version and NPM tag determination process has been updated to use GitHub reference information directly, removing the need for manual input. The publish command now extracts the version from the tag reference and uses the dynamically determined NPM tag.

Changes

File Change Summary
.github/workflows/publish-npm.yaml - Workflow trigger changed from workflow_dispatch to release event
- NPM tag determination now uses set-output instead of environment variables
- Version extraction modified to use GITHUB_REF
- Publish command updated to use dynamically extracted version and tag

Sequence Diagram

sequenceDiagram
    participant GitHub as GitHub Release
    participant Workflow as Publish Workflow
    participant NPM as NPM Registry

    GitHub->>Workflow: Trigger on release published
    Workflow->>Workflow: Extract version from tag
    Workflow->>Workflow: Determine NPM tag
    Workflow->>NPM: Publish package
    NPM-->>Workflow: Publish confirmation
Loading

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.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 87.07%. Comparing base (6d5084a) to head (5faee8f).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #456   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   87.07%   87.07%           
=======================================
  Files           9        9           
  Lines         526      526           
  Branches      128      128           
=======================================
  Hits          458      458           
  Misses         68       68           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@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/workflows/publish-npm.yaml (1)

35-42: LGTM! Consider adding error handling.

The version tag extraction logic is solid and follows best practices. Consider adding validation to ensure the ref is a valid version tag.

 VERSION_TAG=${GITHUB_REF#refs/tags/v}
+if [[ ! $VERSION_TAG =~ ^[0-9]+\.[0-9]+\.[0-9]+(-[a-zA-Z0-9]+)?$ ]]; then
+  echo "Error: Invalid version tag format"
+  exit 1
+fi
 if [[ $VERSION_TAG == *"-"* ]]; then
📜 Review details

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

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 6d5084a and 5faee8f.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .github/workflows/publish-npm.yaml (3 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (4)
  • GitHub Check: generate
  • GitHub Check: test
  • GitHub Check: slither
  • GitHub Check: Analyze (javascript)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
.github/workflows/publish-npm.yaml (3)

4-5: LGTM! Good automation improvement.

Triggering on release publication is a better approach than manual workflow dispatch as it:

  • Ensures synchronization between GitHub releases and NPM versions
  • Reduces human error in version specification
  • Automates the publishing process

45-48: LGTM! Robust publish command configuration.

The publish command is well structured:

  • Uses version from GitHub release tag
  • References NPM tag from previous step output
  • Correctly avoids creating duplicate git tags

23-23: Verify Foundry toolchain requirement.

Please confirm if Foundry is required for the NPM package build process.

Copy link
Member

@lumtis lumtis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@fadeev fadeev merged commit 4b8c89f into main Jan 31, 2025
12 checks passed
@fadeev fadeev deleted the ci-npm-publish branch January 31, 2025 12:24
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.

4 participants