Conversation
ba0d346 to
e42ce59
Compare
WalkthroughThe changes update the version numbers for the project in three files: Changes
Possibly related PRs
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (2)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. 🪧 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 (
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Important
Looks good to me! 👍
Reviewed everything up to ba0d346 in 50 seconds. Click for details.
- Reviewed
43lines of code in3files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
6draft comments. View those below. - Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.
1. Cargo.toml:12
- Draft comment:
Include paths use leading slashes; consider using relative paths (e.g. "src", "examples") to avoid ambiguity. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
2. Cargo.toml:12
- Draft comment:
Remove the leading '/' from include paths; use relative paths (e.g. 'src', 'examples', 'benches'). - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
3. Cargo.toml:1
- Draft comment:
Review workspace members: ensure the root package should be excluded from the members list (only 'napi' is listed). - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
4. Cargo.toml:92
- Draft comment:
Consider listing optional dependencies by name (e.g. 'serde', 'serde_json') instead of using the 'dep:' prefix. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
5. CHANGELOG.md:54
- Draft comment:
Typo: 'pacakge.json' should be corrected to 'package.json'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
6. CHANGELOG.md:433
- Draft comment:
Typo: '(napi)' should be corrected to '(napi)' to maintain consistent formatting. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
Workflow ID: wflow_AXeQ7HjQI9e2f3hO
You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #81 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 93.24% 93.24%
=======================================
Files 13 13
Lines 2858 2858
=======================================
Hits 2665 2665
Misses 193 193 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
CodSpeed Performance ReportMerging #81 will not alter performanceComparing Summary
|
e42ce59 to
81a6381
Compare
81a6381 to
c9e3846
Compare
|
Please retry analysis of this Pull-Request directly on SonarQube Cloud |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Important
Looks good to me! 👍
Reviewed c9e3846 in 30 seconds. Click for details.
- Reviewed
59lines of code in4files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
7draft comments. View those below. - Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.
1. Cargo.toml:12
- Draft comment:
Consider removing leading slashes in include paths; use relative paths (e.g. "src", "examples", "benches") to avoid potential issues on some systems. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
2. npm/package.json:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump to 1.6.3 is consistent; ensure that all related documentation is updated to reflect changes. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:20%<= threshold50%None
3. Cargo.toml:107
- Draft comment:
NAPI settings appear correct; double-check that target configurations in npm/package.json align with supported targets here. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:30%<= threshold50%None
4. Cargo.toml:12
- Draft comment:
The include paths use leading slashes. They should be relative (e.g. 'src' instead of '/src') to avoid packaging issues. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
5. npm/package.json:3
- Draft comment:
NPM package version and NAPI configuration appear correctly updated to 1.6.3. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%None
6. CHANGELOG.md:57
- Draft comment:
Typographical error: 'pacakge.json' should be corrected to 'package.json'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
7. CHANGELOG.md:437
- Draft comment:
Typographical error: The token '(napi)' should likely be corrected to '(napi)' to match the expected formatting. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.
Workflow ID: wflow_f2dt1WEa4N8QY8WT
You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
🤖 New release
unrs_resolver: 1.6.2 -> 1.6.3 (✓ API compatible changes)Changelog
This PR was generated with release-plz.
Important
Bump
unrs_resolverto v1.6.3 with a bug fix forload_as_directoryin pnp mode and a new test case.unrs_resolverversion from 1.6.2 to 1.6.3 inCargo.toml,Cargo.lock, andnpm/package.json.load_as_directoryfor pnp mode.import-js/eslint-import-resolver-typescript#429.CHANGELOG.mdto document bug fix and testing changes.This description was created by
for c9e3846. You can customize this summary. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.
Summary by CodeRabbit