Skip to content

ci: verify lint workflow fixes#1028

Merged
prisis merged 25 commits into
mainfrom
ci/verify-lint-fixes
May 27, 2026
Merged

ci: verify lint workflow fixes#1028
prisis merged 25 commits into
mainfrom
ci/verify-lint-fixes

Conversation

@prisis
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@prisis prisis commented May 27, 2026

Test PR to verify the lint workflow passes after:

  • yaml-lint: fixed quoted-strings + empty-values violations in codeql.yml, test.yml, scorecards.yml
  • lint-workflows: bumped shared workflow pin to pick up the catalog: package.json fix
  • markdown-lint + ts-lint: regenerated pnpm-lock.yaml to match overrides config

Will be closed once green.

Summary by CodeRabbit

Release Notes

  • Chores
    • Updated README with verification marker.

Review Change Stack

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai Bot commented May 27, 2026

Warning

Review limit reached

@prisis, we couldn't start this review because you've reached your PR review rate limit.

More reviews will be available in 27 minutes and 4 seconds. Learn how PR review limits work.

Your organization has run out of usage credits. Purchase more in the billing tab.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

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 include higher PR review limits than trial, open-source, and free plans. In all cases, reviews become available again over time. During sustained high-volume PR review activity, CodeRabbit may temporarily slow when the next review becomes available.

Please see our Fair Usage Limits Policy for further information.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 5c36f654-4950-48d8-9acf-233923825cfd

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f11ff52 and d11d6e5.

📒 Files selected for processing (8)
  • .github/workflows/codeql.yml
  • .github/workflows/dependency-review.yml
  • .github/workflows/lint.yml
  • .github/workflows/lock-file-maintenance.yml
  • .github/workflows/preview-release.yaml
  • .github/workflows/scorecards.yml
  • .github/workflows/test.yml
  • .github/workflows/zizmor.yml
📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This PR adds a single HTML comment marker <!-- ci-verify --> to the README file. The marker is inserted at line 106 and serves as a checkpoint identifier for CI verification workflows, with no other content modifications.

CI Verification Marker

Layer / File(s) Summary
CI verification marker
README.md
HTML comment <!-- ci-verify --> inserted into the README to mark content for CI verification.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~1 minute

Poem

🐰 A marker so small, yet purposeful and true,
A comment for CI, to guide the workflow through,
One line in the README, a checkpoint so bright,
CI verification awaits—the marker shines light! ✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)

Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Title check ❓ Inconclusive The title 'ci: verify lint workflow fixes' is partially related to the changeset. While the title mentions verifying lint workflow fixes, the actual change is only adding an HTML comment marker to README.md, which doesn't directly reflect the broader PR objectives of testing workflow fixes. Clarify whether the title should reflect the actual immediate change (adding CI verification marker to README) or the broader intent (verifying lint workflow fixes). Consider a title like 'Add CI verification marker to README' for clarity about the actual file modification.
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch ci/verify-lint-fixes

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.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented May 27, 2026

Thank you for following the naming conventions! 🙏

github-actions Bot and others added 24 commits May 27, 2026 21:44
…tale overrides

The bot's pnpm audit --fix step adds tmp@<0.2.6: '>=0.2.6' to the
lockfile overrides without persisting to pnpm-workspace.yaml, causing
ERR_PNPM_LOCKFILE_CONFIG_MISMATCH on every frozen install.
@prisis prisis merged commit e3f06c5 into main May 27, 2026
19 of 26 checks passed
@prisis prisis deleted the ci/verify-lint-fixes branch May 27, 2026 22:19
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