chore(website,portal,docs,eslint-config): deploy to Netlify #137
Conversation
📝 Walkthrough📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe pull request introduces several changes across multiple files, primarily focusing on configuration adjustments for deployment settings. Key modifications include updates to the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
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 (
|
✅ Deploy Preview for docs-cuhacking ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
✅ Deploy Preview for portal-cuhacking canceled.
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 10
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (7)
apps/portal/netlify.toml (1)
1-4: LGTM with a suggestion for improvement.The [build] section looks good overall. However, consider the following suggestion:
- The
basedirectory is set to "/", which assumes the portal app is at the root of the repository. If there are multiple projects in this repository, it might be more robust to set it to "/apps/portal/" to ensure consistency.Consider updating the base directory:
[build] -base = "/" +base = "/apps/portal/" publish = "/apps/portal/.next" command = "pnpm nx build portal"This change would make the configuration more resilient to potential repository structure changes.
apps/docs/next.config.mjs (1)
23-24: Consider removing the ESLint disable commentThe ESLint disable comment for the
node/prefer-global/processrule is present. It's generally better to address the underlying issue rather than disabling the rule.Consider updating your ESLint configuration to allow the use of
processglobally if this is intentional throughout your project, rather than disabling the rule inline.apps/docs/src/app/(docs)/source.ts (1)
Line range hint
51-59: Consider improving type safety and default icon handling.While not directly related to the current changes, there are two potential improvements in the
iconfunction:
The commented-out default icon could be addressed. If a default icon is needed, it should be uncommented and implemented. If not needed, consider removing the comment to reduce clutter.
The use of type assertion (
icon as keyof typeof icons) could be replaced with a type guard for better type safety.Consider refactoring the
iconfunction as follows:icon(icon: string | undefined) { if (!icon) { // Uncomment and implement if a default icon is needed // return createElement(HomeIcon) return undefined; } if (icon in icons && typeof icons[icon as keyof typeof icons] === 'function') { return createElement(icons[icon as keyof typeof icons]); } return undefined; }This refactoring improves type safety and makes the function's behavior more explicit.
apps/docs/src/app/(docs)/[[...slug]]/page.tsx (1)
Line range hint
1-91: Overall assessment: Changes look good and align with PR objectives.The modifications in this file are focused on updating path constructions to reflect a new content directory structure. These changes are consistent with the PR objectives and appear to be part of a larger restructuring effort. The main points are:
- The content path has been updated to include
(docs)in the structure.- The GitHub repository URL has been adjusted accordingly.
Both changes seem intentional and well-implemented. However, it's crucial to ensure that these path changes are consistent across the entire project and that the new directory structure exists as expected.
Consider documenting this directory structure change in the project's README or documentation to help other developers understand the new layout.
package.json (2)
19-19: Great addition oflint:inspect-buildscriptThis new script enhances the project's linting capabilities by generating and storing lint inspection results. It's a valuable addition for maintaining code quality.
Consider adding a comment in the script to briefly explain its purpose, like this:
"lint:inspect-build": "# Generate lint inspection results",
58-58: Appropriate addition of Netlify-related dependenciesThe addition of
@netlify/plugin-nextjsandnetlify-clialigns well with the PR objective of enabling deployment to Netlify. These are essential tools for Netlify integration and deployment.Consider adding a comment in the
package.jsonfile to document the purpose of these Netlify-related dependencies. This can help other developers understand why these packages are included. For example:"devDependencies": { // ... other dependencies ... "// Netlify deployment tools": "", "@netlify/plugin-nextjs": "^5.7.3", "netlify-cli": "^17.36.4", // ... other dependencies ... }Also applies to: 113-113
README.md (1)
38-38: LGTM: Updated documentation linkThe update to the documentation link is consistent with the Netlify deployment and improves the overall structure. However, consider adding a brief description of what users can expect to find in the DevDocs for better context.
Consider updating the line to:
For detailed installation instructions, contribution guidelines, and information about our technology stack, please refer to the [cuHacking DevDocs](https://docs.cuhacking.ca/contribution-guidelines).
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
apps/docs/src/app/(docs)/favicon.icois excluded by!**/*.icopnpm-lock.yamlis excluded by!**/pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (15)
- .gitignore (1 hunks)
- README.md (2 hunks)
- apps/docs/netlify.toml (1 hunks)
- apps/docs/next.config.mjs (1 hunks)
- apps/docs/src/app/(docs)/[[...slug]]/page.tsx (1 hunks)
- apps/docs/src/app/(docs)/layout.config.tsx (2 hunks)
- apps/docs/src/app/(docs)/source.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/docs/src/app/api/search/route.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/docs/src/app/global.css (0 hunks)
- apps/docs/src/app/layout.tsx (0 hunks)
- apps/docs/src/app/page.tsx (0 hunks)
- apps/docs/src/content/docs/index.mdx (1 hunks)
- apps/portal/netlify.toml (1 hunks)
- apps/website/netlify.toml (1 hunks)
- package.json (3 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (3)
- apps/docs/src/app/global.css
- apps/docs/src/app/layout.tsx
- apps/docs/src/app/page.tsx
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- .gitignore
- apps/docs/src/app/api/search/route.ts
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 LanguageTool
README.md
[style] ~42-~42: Using many exclamation marks might seem excessive (in this case: 4 exclamation marks for a text that’s 2564 characters long)
Context: ...----------------------------------: | ||
|
| [
🪛 Markdownlint
README.md
40-40: null
No empty links(MD042, no-empty-links)
42-42: null
No empty links(MD042, no-empty-links)
🔇 Additional comments (15)
apps/portal/netlify.toml (1)
6-8: LGTM! The [dev] section is well-configured.The development configuration looks appropriate:
- The base directory is correctly set to "/apps/portal/".
- The development command uses nx to run the portal app in development mode.
This setup should work well for local development.
apps/docs/netlify.toml (2)
6-8: LGTM: Development configuration looks good.The [dev] section is correctly configured:
- The base directory "/apps/docs/" is appropriate for the docs app.
- The command "nx dev docs" correctly uses the nx workflow for development.
10-11: Verify Node.js version consistency across the project.The Node.js version 20.0.0 is a good choice as it's a recent LTS version. However, it's important to ensure this version is consistent with the rest of the project and other apps in the monorepo.
To verify the Node.js version consistency, run the following script:
Please review the output to ensure that the Node.js version is consistent across all relevant configuration files.
✅ Verification successful
To gather the necessary information for verifying the Node.js version consistency across the project, I'll generate shell scripts to search for relevant specifications.
These scripts will help us gather the necessary information to verify the Node.js version consistency across the project.
Node.js version 20.0.0 is consistent across the project
The Node.js version 20.0.0 specified in the apps/docs/netlify.toml file is consistent with other apps in the monorepo. All netlify.toml files (docs, portal, and website) specify the same Node.js version. The only other Node.js version specification found is in the website's package.json, which requires a minimum version of 14, which is compatible with version 20.0.0.
No conflicting Node.js version specifications were found in other configuration files or throughout the project.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check Node.js version consistency across the project # Test: Search for Node.js version specifications in package.json files and other configuration files echo "Searching for Node.js version specifications:" rg -i 'node' --type json --type toml --type yamlLength of output: 295930
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for Node.js version specifications across the project # Search for Node.js version in package.json files echo "Searching for Node.js version in package.json files:" find . -name "package.json" -type f -exec grep -H "\"node\":" {} + # Search for .nvmrc or .node-version files echo -e "\nSearching for .nvmrc or .node-version files:" find . -name ".nvmrc" -o -name ".node-version" # Search for Node.js version in netlify.toml files echo -e "\nSearching for Node.js version in netlify.toml files:" find . -name "netlify.toml" -type f -exec grep -H "NODE_VERSION" {} + # Search for any other occurrences of Node.js version specifications echo -e "\nSearching for other Node.js version specifications:" grep -r --include="*.{json,js,ts,yml,yaml,toml}" -E "node.*?[0-9]+\.[0-9]+\.[0-9]+" .Length of output: 928
apps/website/netlify.toml (2)
11-13: Development configuration looks good.The development settings are consistent with the build configuration and appropriate for a Next.js application using nx.
6-9: Verify handling of static assets with this redirect rule.The current redirect rule sends all requests to Netlify Functions. Ensure that static assets (if any) are properly served and not unnecessarily routed through functions.
Run the following script to check for static asset handling:
✅ Verification successful
Static assets handling is verified and properly configured.
No additional redirect rules for static assets are found, and the presence of the
public/directory indicates that static assets are served correctly without interference from the redirect rule.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for static asset handling in Netlify configuration # Test: Look for additional redirect rules or asset handling rg --type toml 'for = "/static/|for = "/assets/' apps/website/netlify.toml # Test: Check if there's a public directory with static assets fd -t d '(static|assets|public)' apps/websiteLength of output: 145
apps/docs/next.config.mjs (1)
19-27: LGTM: Image configuration added correctlyThe addition of the
imagesconfiguration withremotePatternsis a good practice for security and performance optimization in Next.js applications. It correctly specifies allowed external image sources, which helps prevent potential security issues related to loading images from untrusted sources.The use of an environment variable (
process.env.ALLOWED_IMAGE_HOSTNAME) for the hostname is a flexible approach, allowing for easy configuration across different environments.apps/docs/src/app/(docs)/source.ts (1)
49-49: Confirm the implications of changing the base URL.The
baseUrlhas been changed from '/docs' to '/'. This change aligns with the PR objective of updating the base URL for the docs app. However, it's important to ensure that this modification doesn't break any existing links or routing within the documentation.To verify the consistency of this change and its potential impact, let's run the following checks:
These checks will help ensure that the base URL change is consistently applied throughout the documentation system and identify any potential issues that may arise from this modification.
apps/docs/src/app/(docs)/[[...slug]]/page.tsx (1)
26-26: LGTM. Verify GitHub URL correctness.The GitHub repository URL has been updated to reflect the new content directory structure. This change is consistent with the earlier path modification.
To ensure the new GitHub URL is correct, please run the following script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the new GitHub URL structure # Test: Extract the GitHub URL from the file github_url=$(rg -o 'href=\{`(.+?)/blob/main/apps/\(docs\)/' apps/docs/src/app/\(docs\)/\[\[...slug\]\]/page.tsx | sed 's/href=`//; s/\/blob\/main\/apps\/\(docs\)\///') # Test: Check if the extracted URL is valid if [ -n "$github_url" ]; then echo "Extracted GitHub URL: $github_url" # Test: Verify if the URL is accessible if curl --output /dev/null --silent --head --fail "$github_url"; then echo "GitHub URL is valid and accessible." else echo "Warning: GitHub URL may not be accessible. Please verify manually." fi else echo "Warning: Could not extract GitHub URL from the file." fiapps/docs/src/app/(docs)/layout.config.tsx (2)
Line range hint
1-105: Summary: URL structure simplification looks good, verify site-wide impact.The changes in this file consistently update the URL structure by removing the '/docs' prefix from both the base URL and sidebar navigation. This aligns well with the PR objectives and should result in cleaner, more intuitive URLs for the documentation.
To ensure these changes don't inadvertently affect other parts of the application, please conduct a thorough testing of the documentation navigation, including:
- Checking that all internal links within the documentation work correctly.
- Verifying that any external links to specific documentation pages are updated if necessary.
- Testing the sidebar navigation to confirm all links lead to the correct pages.
- Reviewing any build scripts or deployment configurations that might reference the old URL structure.
#!/bin/bash # Description: Comprehensive check for '/docs' references that might need updating # Test 1: Check for '/docs' in URL paths or string literals rg --type=typescript --type=javascript --type=jsx --type=tsx '/docs(?=/|"|`)' # Test 2: Check for hardcoded references to 'docs.cuhacking.ca/docs' rg --type=typescript --type=javascript --type=jsx --type=tsx 'docs\.cuhacking\.ca/docs' # Test 3: Check configuration files for '/docs' references rg '/docs' *.toml *.yaml *.json # Note: Review all matches to determine if they need updating in light of the new URL structure.
86-86: LGTM! Ensure consistent URL structure across components.This change correctly updates the sidebar navigation URLs to match the new base URL structure, removing the '/docs' prefix. This is consistent with the previous change and improves the overall URL structure of the documentation.
To ensure this change is applied consistently, please run the following verification:
✅ Verification successful
LGTM! URL structure update verified.
The change successfully updates the sidebar navigation URLs by removing the '/docs' prefix, ensuring consistency with the new base URL structure. The remaining instances of '/docs/' are found in external links and configuration files where the prefix is contextually necessary.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any remaining '/docs/' prefixes in URL construction across components. # Test: Search for '/docs/' in URL constructions rg --type=typescript --type=javascript --type=jsx --type=tsx '`/docs/\$\{.*\}`' # Note: Review any matches to determine if they need updating to match the new URL structure.Length of output: 573
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any remaining '/docs/' prefixes in URL construction across components using PCRE2. # Test: Search for '/docs/' in URL constructions with look-around using PCRE2 rg --pcre2 --type=typescript --type=javascript --type=jsx --type=tsx '/docs(?=/|"|`)'Length of output: 122
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any remaining '/docs/' prefixes in URL constructions across all files. # Test: Search for '/docs/' in URL constructions without restricting file types rg '/docs/' --glob '!*node_modules/*'Length of output: 7938
package.json (3)
17-18: Excellent update to usepnpxinstead ofnpxThis change aligns the script execution with the project's package manager (pnpm). Using
pnpxinstead ofnpxis more efficient in pnpm workspaces and ensures consistency across the project.
Line range hint
1-138: Overall, excellent updates to package.jsonThe changes in this file are well-aligned with the PR objectives and improve the project's tooling. The updates to the linting scripts, the addition of the lint inspection build script, and the inclusion of Netlify-related dependencies all contribute to enhancing the project's development and deployment capabilities.
The use of
pnpxinstead ofnpxshows attention to consistency with the project's package manager. The addition of@eslint/config-inspectorand the new lint inspection build script demonstrate a commitment to code quality.The Netlify-related dependencies appropriately support the goal of deploying to Netlify, as stated in the PR objectives.
Great job on these updates! The minor suggestions provided in the previous comments can further improve documentation and maintainability.
55-55: Appropriate addition of@eslint/config-inspectordependencyThis devDependency is correctly added to support the new
lint:inspect-buildscript. The version^0.5.4allows for compatible updates.As this seems to be a relatively new package (version 0.5.4), it's advisable to monitor for updates and potential breaking changes. Let's check for the latest version:
README.md (2)
2-2: LGTM: Updated main link to production URLThe change from the test deployment URL to the official portal URL (
https://portal.cuhacking.ca) is appropriate and aligns with the PR objective of deploying to Netlify.
Line range hint
1-42: Overall README improvementsThe changes to the README.md file align well with the PR objectives and improve the document's clarity and consistency. The main areas of improvement are:
- Updated links to reflect the new Netlify deployments.
- Improved formatting of the documentation section.
To further enhance the README:
- Consider adding more context to the DevDocs link description.
- Address the empty Design System link as suggested in the previous comment.
These changes will make the README more informative and user-friendly.
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[style] ~42-~42: Using many exclamation marks might seem excessive (in this case: 4 exclamation marks for a text that’s 2564 characters long)
Context: ...----------------------------------: | |(EN_EXCESSIVE_EXCLAMATION)
🪛 Markdownlint
40-40: null
No empty links(MD042, no-empty-links)
42-42: null
No empty links(MD042, no-empty-links)
| [build.environment] | ||
| NODE_VERSION = "20.0.0" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider using an LTS version of Node.js with a more flexible version specification.
While setting a specific Node.js version is good practice, there are two points to consider:
- Node.js 20.0.0 is not an LTS (Long Term Support) version. For production deployments, it's generally recommended to use LTS versions for better stability and longer support.
- Specifying an exact version (20.0.0) might require frequent updates. A more flexible version specification could be beneficial.
Consider updating the Node.js version specification:
[build.environment]
-NODE_VERSION = "20.0.0"
+NODE_VERSION = "18.x"This change would use the latest patch version of Node.js 18 (which is currently LTS), providing a balance between stability and staying up-to-date.
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| [build.environment] | |
| NODE_VERSION = "20.0.0" | |
| [build.environment] | |
| NODE_VERSION = "18.x" |
apps/website/netlify.toml
Outdated
| [[headers]] | ||
| for = "/build/*" | ||
|
|
||
| [headers.values] | ||
| Cache-Control = "public, max-age=31536000, s-maxage=31536000" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider implementing a cache-busting strategy.
While the current caching policy can significantly improve performance, it may lead to outdated content being served after updates. Consider implementing a cache-busting strategy, such as including a hash in filenames for static assets.
Would you like assistance in implementing a cache-busting strategy or adjusting the build process to include file hashes?
apps/website/netlify.toml
Outdated
| [build] | ||
| base = "/apps/website/" | ||
| publish = "./build" | ||
| command = "pnpm i && pnpm exec playwright install && nx build website" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider using a lockfile-based install command.
The build command uses pnpm i which may introduce inconsistencies in CI/CD environments. Consider using pnpm install --frozen-lockfile instead to ensure reproducible builds.
Apply this diff to update the build command:
-command = "pnpm i && pnpm exec playwright install && nx build website"
+command = "pnpm install --frozen-lockfile && pnpm exec playwright install && nx build website"📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| [build] | |
| base = "/apps/website/" | |
| publish = "./build" | |
| command = "pnpm i && pnpm exec playwright install && nx build website" | |
| [build] | |
| base = "/apps/website/" | |
| publish = "./build" | |
| command = "pnpm install --frozen-lockfile && pnpm exec playwright install && nx build website" |
| [build.environment] | ||
| NODE_VERSION = "20.0.0" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider using a more flexible Node.js version specification.
While using a recent LTS version is good, specifying the exact patch version (20.0.0) might lead to inconsistencies. Consider using a more flexible version specification like "20.x" to allow for patch updates.
Apply this diff to update the Node.js version:
-NODE_VERSION = "20.0.0"
+NODE_VERSION = "20.x"📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| [build.environment] | |
| NODE_VERSION = "20.0.0" | |
| [build.environment] | |
| NODE_VERSION = "20.x" |
| { | ||
| protocol: 'https', | ||
| // eslint-disable-next-line node/prefer-global/process | ||
| hostname: process.env.ALLOWED_IMAGE_HOSTNAME || 'avatars.githubusercontent.com', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Suggestion: Use nullish coalescing for fallback
Instead of using the logical OR operator for the fallback, consider using the nullish coalescing operator (??). This will only use the fallback value if the environment variable is null or undefined, not if it's an empty string.
Here's the suggested change:
- hostname: process.env.ALLOWED_IMAGE_HOSTNAME || 'avatars.githubusercontent.com',
+ hostname: process.env.ALLOWED_IMAGE_HOSTNAME ?? 'avatars.githubusercontent.com',This change ensures that an empty string in the environment variable (which might be intentional) is not overridden by the fallback value.
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| hostname: process.env.ALLOWED_IMAGE_HOSTNAME || 'avatars.githubusercontent.com', | |
| hostname: process.env.ALLOWED_IMAGE_HOSTNAME ?? 'avatars.githubusercontent.com', |
| @@ -17,13 +17,13 @@ export default async function Page({ | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| const MDX = page.data.exports.default | |||
| const path = `src/content/docs/${page.file.path}` | |||
| const path = `src/content/(docs)/${page.file.path}` | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Path Verification Failed
The directory src/content/(docs) does not exist. Please verify the correct directory structure or update the path in the code accordingly.
🔗 Analysis chain
LGTM. Verify new content structure.
The path construction has been updated to reflect the new content directory structure. This change aligns with the PR objectives.
To ensure the new path is correct, please run the following script:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the existence of the new content directory structure
# Test: Check if the new directory structure exists
if [ -d "src/content/(docs)" ]; then
echo "New directory structure exists: src/content/(docs)"
else
echo "Warning: New directory structure not found: src/content/(docs)"
fi
# Test: List files in the new directory structure
echo "Files in the new directory structure:"
fd . "src/content/(docs)" -t f
Length of output: 665
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the existence of the new content directory structure
# Test: Check if the new directory structure exists
if [ -d "src/content/(docs)" ]; then
echo "New directory structure exists: src/content/(docs)"
else
echo "Warning: New directory structure not found: src/content/(docs)"
fi
# Test: List files in the new directory structure
echo "Files in the new directory structure:"
fd . "src/content/(docs)" -t f
Length of output: 392
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for existence of 'docs' directories under src/content
echo "Searching for 'docs' directories under src/content:"
fd "docs" "src/content" -t d
Length of output: 244
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the existence of 'src/content' and list its subdirectories
# Check if 'src/content' exists
if [ -d "src/content" ]; then
echo "Directory exists: src/content"
echo "Listing subdirectories in src/content:"
fd --type d "" "src/content"
else
echo "Directory not found: src/content"
echo "Searching for any 'docs' directories in the repository:"
fd "docs" --type d
fi
Length of output: 414
| @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ export const baseOptions: HomeLayoutProps = { | |||
| <span className="text-lg font-bold">cuHacking DevDocs</span> | |||
| </> | |||
| ), | |||
| url: '/docs', | |||
| url: '/', | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Action Required: Update Remaining '/docs' References
Several instances of '/docs' remain in the codebase and need to be updated to reflect the new base URL:
-
apps/hackathon/src/app/docs/layout.config.tsx:url: '/docs',url: \/docs/${page.url}``
-
apps/hackathon/src/app/api/search/route.ts:import { getPages } from '@/app/docs/source'
-
apps/hackathon/src/app/docs/[[...slug]]/page.tsx:import { getPage, getPages } from '@/app/docs/source'const path = \src/content/docs/${page.file.path}``
-
apps/docs/src/content/docs/knowledge-base/cuHacking-2020-wiki/constants.ts:export const CUHACKING_2020_WIKI_URL = '/docs/knowledge-base/cuHacking-2020-wiki'
Please update these references to ensure consistency and prevent potential navigation issues.
🔗 Analysis chain
LGTM! Verify impact on navigation.
The change from '/docs' to '/' for the base URL aligns with the PR objective and simplifies the URL structure. This is a good improvement.
To ensure this change doesn't break existing links or navigation, please run the following verification:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any remaining '/docs' references in URL paths that might need updating.
# Test: Search for '/docs' in URL paths across the codebase
rg --type=typescript --type=javascript --type=jsx --type=tsx '/docs(?=/|"|`)'
# Note: Review any matches to determine if they need updating in light of this base URL change.
Length of output: 573
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for any remaining '/docs' references in URL paths across relevant file types.
# Using PCRE2 to enable look-around
rg --pcre2 '/docs(?=/|"|`)' --glob '*.ts' --glob '*.tsx' --glob '*.js' --glob '*.jsx'
# Alternatively, without look-around for broader matching
rg '/docs' --glob '*.ts' --glob '*.tsx' --glob '*.js' --glob '*.jsx'
Length of output: 7658
| @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ title: Welcome to the Docs | |||
| description: Leave none behind regardless of our development cost. | |||
| --- | |||
|
|
|||
| import { pages } from "../../app/docs/source"; | |||
| import { pages } from "../../app/(docs)/source"; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Found remaining instances of the old import path
The import path "../../app/docs/source" is still used in the following file:
apps/hackathon/src/content/docs/index.mdx
Please update all instances to "../../app/(docs)/source" to ensure consistency across the project.
🔗 Analysis chain
Approve import path change and verify consistency
The update to the import path from "../../app/docs/source" to "../../app/(docs)/source" appears to be correct and aligns with the PR objective of updating the base URL for the 'docs' app.
To ensure consistency across the project, please run the following script:
If this change is part of a larger restructuring of the project's directory, consider updating the project's documentation to reflect these changes, especially if it affects how developers navigate or import files.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the usage of the new import path across the project
# Test 1: Check for any remaining instances of the old import path
echo "Checking for old import path..."
rg --type mdx --type tsx --type ts "from \"../../app/docs/source\""
# Test 2: Verify the existence of the new source directory
echo "Verifying new source directory..."
fd -t d "(docs)/source" apps/docs/src/app
# Test 3: Check for consistent usage of the new import path
echo "Checking for consistent usage of new import path..."
rg --type mdx --type tsx --type ts "from \"../../app/\(docs\)/source\""
Length of output: 502
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Re-verify the usage of the new import path across the project with corrected file type handling
# Test 1: Check for any remaining instances of the old import path
echo "Checking for old import path..."
rg "from \"../../app/docs/source\"" -g '*.mdx' -g '*.tsx' -g '*.ts'
# Test 2: Verify the existence of the new source directory
echo "Verifying new source directory..."
fd -t d "(docs)/source" apps/docs/src/app
# Test 3: Check for consistent usage of the new import path
echo "Checking for consistent usage of new import path..."
rg "from \"../../app/(docs)/source\"" -g '*.mdx' -g '*.tsx' -g '*.ts'
Length of output: 622
| | [📚 Documentation](https://docs.cuhacking.ca) | [🗓️ Project Board](https://github.com/orgs/cuhacking/projects/4) | [💅 Figma](https://www.figma.com/files/team/1400857924219798056/project/261344209/2025?fuid=1196916890248607098) | [🌟 Design System (WIP)](#) | | ||
| | :----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------: | :-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------: | :-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------: | :----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------: | | ||
| | [](https://docs.cuhacking.ca) | [](https://github.com/orgs/cuhacking/projects/4) | [](https://www.figma.com/files/team/1400857924219798056/project/261344209/2025?fuid=1196916890248607098) | [](#) | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Improved formatting, but address the empty Design System link
The reformatting of the documentation section improves the visual presentation. However, there's an issue with the Design System link:
- The Design System link is empty, which violates markdown best practices (MD042).
- It's marked as "WIP" (Work in Progress), but doesn't provide any information on its current state or expected completion.
Consider one of the following options:
- If there's a placeholder or in-progress page for the Design System, link to it.
- If no page exists yet, remove the link and add a note about its future availability:
| [📚 Documentation](https://docs.cuhacking.ca) | [🗓️ Project Board](https://github.com/orgs/cuhacking/projects/4) | [💅 Figma](https://www.figma.com/files/team/1400857924219798056/project/261344209/2025?fuid=1196916890248607098) | 🌟 Design System (Coming Soon) |This change will resolve the empty link issue and provide clearer information to users.
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[style] ~42-~42: Using many exclamation marks might seem excessive (in this case: 4 exclamation marks for a text that’s 2564 characters long)
Context: ...----------------------------------: | |(EN_EXCESSIVE_EXCLAMATION)
🪛 Markdownlint
40-40: null
No empty links(MD042, no-empty-links)
42-42: null
No empty links(MD042, no-empty-links)
✅ Deploy Preview for eslint-config-cuhacking canceled.
|
✅ Deploy Preview for website-cuhacking canceled.
|
JowiAoun
force-pushed
the
jowi/build/136-deploy-to-netlify
branch
from
b8fa1fc to
246dc27
Compare
|
Did we change our conventions for scope separators? |
HasithDeAlwis
force-pushed
the
jowi/build/136-deploy-to-netlify
branch
from
9826776 to
e378903
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
apps/docs-e2e/src/docs.spec.ts (2)
Line range hint
137-139: Update constant name in testThe test is still using the old
DOCS_BASE_URLconstant. Please update it to use the newCUHACKING_2025_DOCS_URLconstant for consistency.Apply this change:
- await expect(docsLayoutPage.page).toHaveURL(DOCS_BASE_URL) + await expect(docsLayoutPage.page).toHaveURL(CUHACKING_2025_DOCS_URL)
Line range hint
235-237: Update constant name in testThe test is still using the old
DOCS_BASE_URLconstant. Please update it to use the newCUHACKING_2025_DOCS_URLconstant for consistency.Apply this change:
- await expect(docsLayoutPage.page).toHaveURL(DOCS_BASE_URL) + await expect(docsLayoutPage.page).toHaveURL(CUHACKING_2025_DOCS_URL)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
pnpm-lock.yamlis excluded by!**/pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (7)
- .gitignore (1 hunks)
- apps/docs-e2e/src/docs.spec.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/docs-e2e/src/pom.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/docs/netlify.toml (1 hunks)
- apps/portal/netlify.toml (1 hunks)
- apps/website/netlify.toml (1 hunks)
- package.json (3 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (5)
- .gitignore
- apps/docs/netlify.toml
- apps/portal/netlify.toml
- apps/website/netlify.toml
- package.json
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (2)
apps/docs-e2e/src/pom.ts (1)
105-105: LGTM! Verify URL consistency across the codebase.The change from 'http://localhost:3000/docs' to 'http://localhost:3000' aligns with the PR objective of updating the base URL for the
docsapp. This modification looks good and appears to be intentional.To ensure consistency across the codebase, please run the following script to check for any remaining references to the old URL:
✅ Verification successful
URL consistency confirmed across the codebase.
No remaining references to
localhost:3000/docswere found, ensuring that the base URL update has been successfully applied throughout the codebase.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for any remaining references to '/docs' in the URL # Test: Search for '/docs' in the URL across all files rg --type-add 'code:*.{js,ts,jsx,tsx,html,css,scss,json,md,yml,yaml}' --type code 'localhost:3000/docs' # Note: If this returns results, those files may need to be updated to reflect the new base URL.Length of output: 103
apps/docs-e2e/src/docs.spec.ts (1)
Line range hint
1-353: Overall review summaryThe renaming of
DOCS_BASE_URLtoCUHACKING_2025_DOCS_URLis a good change that improves clarity. However, two instances of the old constant name were found in the tests. Please update these as suggested in the previous comments.Additionally, it's recommended to perform a thorough check of the entire codebase to ensure no other occurrences of
DOCS_BASE_URLwere missed during this update.Run the following script to check for any remaining instances of the old constant name in the entire codebase:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any remaining instances of DOCS_BASE_URL in the entire codebase # Test: Search for DOCS_BASE_URL. Expect: No results. rg --type typescript 'DOCS_BASE_URL'
JowiAoun
changed the title
package.json
Outdated
| @@ -51,6 +52,7 @@ | |||
| "@commitlint/cz-commitlint": "^19.2.0", | |||
| "@commitlint/types": "^19.0.3", | |||
| "@eslint-react/eslint-plugin": "^1.10.1", | |||
| "@eslint/config-inspector": "^0.5.4", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If this dependency was added in this commit, it needs to be in a separate chore(deps)... The script additions should remain in this config commit, and if changed, a new config commit should be made.
import is misleading in the context of this project, I was expecting an import something from ....
| @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ | |||
| [build] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the message for this commit is incomplete
JowiAoun
force-pushed
the
jowi/build/136-deploy-to-netlify
branch
from
e378903 to
34a271f
Compare
pnpm add -D @netlify/pugin-nextjs
JowiAoun
force-pushed
the
jowi/build/136-deploy-to-netlify
branch
from
34a271f to
1b98714
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Caution
Inline review comments failed to post
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
apps/docs-e2e/src/docs.spec.ts (1)
Line range hint
138-138: Update remaining instances ofDOCS_BASE_URLThere are two instances where
DOCS_BASE_URLis still being used instead of the newCUHACKING_2025_DOCS_URL:
- Line 138:
await expect(docsLayoutPage.page).toHaveURL(DOCS_BASE_URL)- Line 228:
await expect(docsLayoutPage.page).toHaveURL(DOCS_BASE_URL)Please update these lines to use the new constant name:
- await expect(docsLayoutPage.page).toHaveURL(DOCS_BASE_URL) + await expect(docsLayoutPage.page).toHaveURL(CUHACKING_2025_DOCS_URL)This change will ensure consistency throughout the file and prevent potential issues.
Also applies to: 228-228
🛑 Comments failed to post (1)
apps/docs-e2e/src/docs.spec.ts (1)
17-17: 💡 Codebase verification
DOCS_BASE_URL still in use
Found remaining instances of
DOCS_BASE_URLinapps/docs-e2e/src/docs.spec.ts:
- Line 17:
await expect(docsLayoutPage.page).toHaveURL(DOCS_BASE_URL)- Line 17:
await expect(docsLayoutPage.page).toHaveURL(DOCS_BASE_URL)🔗 Analysis chain
Constant renamed:
DOCS_BASE_URLtoCUHACKING_2025_DOCS_URLThe constant has been renamed from
DOCS_BASE_URLtoCUHACKING_2025_DOCS_URL. This change improves clarity by specifying the year and project in the constant name.Let's verify if all instances of the old constant name have been updated:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any remaining instances of DOCS_BASE_URL # Test: Search for DOCS_BASE_URL. Expect: No results. rg --type typescript 'DOCS_BASE_URL' apps/docs-e2e/src/docs.spec.tsLength of output: 102
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any remaining instances of DOCS_BASE_URL # Test: Search for DOCS_BASE_URL in apps/docs-e2e/src/docs.spec.ts. Expect: No results. rg 'DOCS_BASE_URL' apps/docs-e2e/src/docs.spec.tsLength of output: 175
JowiAoun
force-pushed
the
jowi/build/136-deploy-to-netlify
branch
from
1b98714 to
ed66f14
Compare
pnpm add -D netlify-cli
JowiAoun
force-pushed
the
jowi/build/136-deploy-to-netlify
branch
from
ed66f14 to
02e9a58
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
amplify.yml (1)
Line range hint
3-15: Summary of changes in amplify.ymlThe modifications to amplify.yml reflect a shift from a 'docs' application to a 'website' application. These changes are consistent with the PR objectives and maintain the existing structure of the configuration. Key points:
- The application root has been updated to 'apps/website'.
- The build command now targets the 'website' application.
- The artifacts base directory has been changed to 'apps/website/build'.
These changes imply a restructuring of the application, which may have broader implications for the project setup and deployment processes.
Consider reviewing the overall project structure and deployment strategy to ensure all applications (docs, portal, website, eslint-config) are consistently configured and can be deployed efficiently to their respective environments.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- amplify.yml (2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (2)
amplify.yml (2)
15-15: LGTM. Verify deployment processes.The change in baseDirectory from '.next' to 'apps/website/build' reflects a different build output structure for the website application. This is more specific and aligns well with the monorepo structure.
Please ensure that all deployment scripts and CI/CD pipelines are updated to use the new build artifact location. Run the following script to check for any remaining references to the old '.next' directory:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for references to the old '.next' directory in deployment-related files rg '\.next' --type yaml --type json --type js
13-13: LGTM. Verify build process.The build command has been updated to match the new application name, which is consistent with the change in appRoot.
To ensure the build process works correctly with the new configuration, please run the following script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the build command for the website application pnpm nx build website --verbose
amplify.yml
Outdated
| @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ | |||
| version: 1 | |||
| applications: | |||
| - appRoot: apps/docs | |||
| - appRoot: apps/website | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Remaining References to 'apps/docs' Found
There are still references to apps/docs in the following files:
apps/docs/tsconfig.jsonapps/docs/eslint.config.jsapps/docs-e2e/eslint.config.js
Please update these references to ensure consistency with the new appRoot configuration.
🔗 Analysis chain
LGTM. Verify related configurations.
The change from 'apps/docs' to 'apps/website' aligns with the PR objective. This shift suggests a broader scope for the application.
Please ensure that this change is consistent with other configuration files and scripts. Run the following script to check for any remaining references to 'apps/docs':
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any remaining references to 'apps/docs'
rg 'apps/docs' --type yaml --type json --type js
Length of output: 1209
JowiAoun
force-pushed
the
jowi/build/136-deploy-to-netlify
branch
2 times, most recently
from
c6fd877 to
1ab8382
Compare
Currently uses too many build minutes, and portal previews are breaking
JowiAoun
force-pushed
the
jowi/build/136-deploy-to-netlify
branch
from
1ab8382 to
4230d79
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (8)
apps/website/app/routes/_index.tsx (1)
1-11: Overall assessment: Improved dynamic content with server-side data fetchingThe changes in this file introduce server-side data fetching and a more dynamic welcome message, which can potentially improve user experience and initial page load times. However, there are a few areas that warrant further consideration:
- Error Handling: Ensure robust error handling is implemented for the API call to
api.user.hello().- Performance Monitoring: Keep an eye on the impact of this server-side API call on build times and server-side rendering performance.
- Consistency: Verify that this approach aligns with the patterns used in other parts of the application.
These changes are a step in the right direction for creating a more dynamic and personalized user experience. Great job on implementing server-side data fetching!
Consider implementing a centralized error handling mechanism for API calls if not already in place. This could involve creating a wrapper function for API calls that includes standardized error handling and logging.
apps/website/package.json (1)
11-15: LGTM! Consider adding alintscript for consistency.The added scripts align well with the PR objectives for Netlify deployment. The
build,dev, andstartscripts are appropriately configured for a Remix project using Vite and Netlify.Consider adding a
lintscript to maintain consistency with other packages in the monorepo. This could be helpful for CI/CD processes and local development. For example:"scripts": { "build": "pnpm remix vite:build", "dev": "pnpm remix vite:dev", - "start": "pnpm netlify serve" + "start": "pnpm netlify serve", + "lint": "eslint ." },package.json (1)
22-22: Consider moving Netlify packages to devDependenciesThe addition of
@eslint/config-inspectorand Netlify-related packages aligns with the PR objectives and the new linting scripts. However, the Netlify packages are typically used during development and deployment, not at runtime. Consider moving them to thedevDependenciessection for better organization and to potentially reduce the production bundle size.Also applies to: 24-28
apps/docs/src/content/docs/contribution-guidelines/index.mdx (5)
334-343: Approved: Helpful addition for E2E testing setupThis callout provides valuable information about Playwright browser installation, which is crucial for E2E testing. The warning about potential pipeline issues is particularly important.
Consider adding a brief explanation of why Playwright browsers might break pipelines. This could help contributors make informed decisions about when to install them.
Line range hint
291-333: Approved: Clear instructions for running different projectsThe new tabbed structure for running different projects (Website, Hacker Portal, DevDocs) is well-organized and aligns with the PR objectives. The use of
nx runcommands is consistent with the monorepo migration.Consider adding a brief explanation of what each project (Website, Hacker Portal, DevDocs) is responsible for. This could help new contributors understand the project structure better.
Line range hint
103-159: Approved: Comprehensive development environment setup instructionsThe updated setup instructions are clear and cover all necessary steps for setting up the development environment. The addition of Docker setup aligns well with the PR objectives related to deployment configuration.
Consider adding a note about the minimum required versions for Docker and Node.js. This could help prevent potential compatibility issues for contributors.
Line range hint
345-421: Approved: Helpful explanation of Nx commandsThe new accordion explaining Nx command syntax and usage is a valuable addition, especially in the context of the monorepo migration. The information about running multiple targets, filtering projects, and using Nx Console is particularly useful for contributors.
Consider adding a link to the official Nx documentation for more advanced usage scenarios. This could be helpful for contributors who want to dive deeper into Nx capabilities.
Line range hint
1-429: Approved: Excellent restructuring and content updatesThe overall restructuring of the document significantly improves its clarity and usability. The new sections, callouts, and accordions make the information more digestible and user-friendly. The content updates accurately reflect the monorepo structure and deployment to Netlify, aligning well with the PR objectives.
Consider adding a table of contents at the beginning of the document to help users quickly navigate to specific sections. This could further enhance the usability of this comprehensive guide.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
pnpm-lock.yamlis excluded by!**/pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (15)
- amplify.yml (0 hunks)
- apps/docs/netlify.toml (1 hunks)
- apps/docs/src/content/docs/contribution-guidelines/index.mdx (1 hunks)
- apps/portal/netlify.toml (1 hunks)
- apps/website/app/root.tsx (2 hunks)
- apps/website/app/routes/_index.tsx (1 hunks)
- apps/website/lib/trpc/react.tsx (1 hunks)
- apps/website/lib/trpc/server.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/website/lib/trpc/trpc.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/website/netlify.toml (1 hunks)
- apps/website/package.json (1 hunks)
- apps/website/vite.config.ts (1 hunks)
- libs/auth/src/auth.ts (3 hunks)
- libs/auth/src/lucia.ts (1 hunks)
- package.json (4 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- amplify.yml
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- apps/docs/netlify.toml
- apps/portal/netlify.toml
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Biome
apps/website/lib/trpc/react.tsx
[error] 25-25: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
🔇 Additional comments (25)
apps/website/lib/trpc/trpc.ts (3)
1-3: LGTM: Proper imports for TRPC setupThe import statements are correct and necessary for setting up the TRPC client:
AppRoutertype from '@cuhacking/api' defines the API structure.createTRPCReactfrom '@trpc/react-query' is used to create the TRPC client for React applications.These imports provide the foundation for type-safe API interactions in the React application.
1-5: Well-implemented TRPC client setupThis file efficiently sets up a TRPC client for the React application:
- It imports necessary types and functions.
- It creates and exports a type-safe API client using
createTRPCReact<AppRouter>().Benefits of this implementation:
- Provides type safety for API interactions across the application.
- Centralizes API client creation, promoting consistency and ease of maintenance.
- Leverages the
AppRoutertype from a separate package, ensuring alignment with the backend API structure.Overall, this is a clean and effective setup for integrating TRPC in the React application.
5-5: LGTM: Correct TRPC client setupThe
apiconstant is properly created and exported usingcreateTRPCReact<AppRouter>(). This setup ensures type-safe API interactions throughout the application.To ensure the
AppRoutertype is correctly defined and exported, let's verify its implementation:apps/website/app/routes/_index.tsx (3)
9-9: Dynamic title prop using API responseThe
titleprop of theNxWelcomecomponent now uses the dynamichello.messageinstead of a static string. This change makes the welcome message more dynamic and potentially personalized.Let's verify if this pattern is consistent across the application:
#!/bin/bash # Search for other instances of NxWelcome component usage rg --type typescript "<NxWelcome" apps/
4-4: New asynchronous API call for server-side data fetchingThe introduction of
const hello = await api.user.hello()outside the component suggests this is being used in a server-side rendering context. This approach can improve initial page load times, but there are a few considerations:
- Error handling: Ensure proper error handling is in place for this API call.
- Performance impact: Be aware of the potential impact on build time and server-side rendering performance due to this additional API call.
Let's verify the error handling for this API call:
#!/bin/bash # Search for error handling patterns around the api.user.hello() call rg --type typescript -A 5 -B 5 "api\.user\.hello\(\)" apps/
2-2: New import introduces server-side API dependencyThe addition of the
apiimport from the TRPC server module indicates a shift towards server-side data fetching. This approach can potentially improve initial page load times by having data ready before the component renders.Let's verify if this import is consistent with other parts of the application:
✅ Verification successful
TRPC Server API Import is Consistent
The
apiimport from the TRPC server module is only present inapps/website/app/routes/_index.tsx. This ensures that the server-side data fetching is consistently introduced in this specific file without affecting other parts of the application.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for other instances of TRPC server API usage rg --type typescript "from '../../lib/trpc/server'" apps/Length of output: 96
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for other instances of TRPC server API usage in TypeScript files rg --type ts --type tsx "from '../../lib/trpc/server'" apps/Length of output: 96
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for other instances of TRPC server API usage in TypeScript files rg "from '../../lib/trpc/server'" --glob '*.ts' --glob '*.tsx' apps/Length of output: 155
apps/website/lib/trpc/server.ts (3)
15-15: LGTM: Proper setup for TRPC caller.The export of the
apiconstant usingcreateCaller(createContext)is correct and follows TRPC patterns. This setup will allow for easy access to TRPC procedures throughout the application.
5-13:⚠️ Potential issueReview the implementation of createContext function.
The
createContextfunction contains commented-out code related to headers and currently uses an emptyHeadersobject. This raises a few concerns:
The commented-out code suggests there was a plan to use request headers, possibly for tracking the source of TRPC calls. If this functionality is important, consider implementing it or add a TODO comment explaining why it's postponed.
Using an empty
Headersobject might not be the intended behavior. This could potentially lead to missing important header information in your TRPC context.Consider either:
a) Implementing the commented-out code if the header information is necessary.
b) Explaining why an empty Headers object is sufficient for your use case.
c) Removing the Headers object entirely if it's not needed.To verify the impact of using an empty Headers object, run the following script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for other usages of createTRPCContext to understand the impact of empty headers echo "Searching for other usages of createTRPCContext:" rg --type typescript 'createTRPCContext' echo "Searching for usages of headers in TRPC context:" rg --type typescript 'headers.*createTRPCContext'
1-3: Verify the necessity of the commented-out import and active import.The commented-out import of
headersfrom 'next/headers' suggests that there might have been a plan to use Next.js headers. Consider the following:
- If the commented-out import is no longer needed, it's best to remove it entirely to keep the code clean.
- If there's a plan to use it in the future, consider adding a TODO comment explaining why it's commented out and when it might be needed.
Also, please verify that the import from '@cuhacking/api' is the correct package and version for your TRPC setup.
To verify the usage of '@cuhacking/api' package, run the following script:
apps/website/netlify.toml (4)
1-3: Consider using a lockfile-based install command.The build command uses
pnpm iwhich may introduce inconsistencies in CI/CD environments. Consider usingpnpm install --frozen-lockfileinstead to ensure reproducible builds.Apply this diff to update the build command:
-command = "pnpm i && pnpm remix vite:build apps/website" +command = "pnpm install --frozen-lockfile && pnpm remix vite:build apps/website"The rest of the build configuration looks good and appropriate for a Remix application.
5-7: LGTM: Development configuration looks good.The development command and publish directory are appropriate for a Remix application and consistent with the build configuration.
9-13: 🛠️ Refactor suggestionConsider implementing a cache-busting strategy.
While the current caching policy can significantly improve performance, it may lead to outdated content being served after updates. Consider implementing a cache-busting strategy, such as including a hash in filenames for static assets.
Would you like assistance in implementing a cache-busting strategy or adjusting the build process to include file hashes?
15-16: 🛠️ Refactor suggestionConsider using a more flexible Node.js version specification.
While using a recent LTS version is good, specifying the exact patch version (20.0.0) might lead to inconsistencies. Consider using a more flexible version specification like "20.x" to allow for patch updates.
Apply this diff to update the Node.js version:
-NODE_VERSION = "20.0.0" +NODE_VERSION = "20.x"apps/website/app/root.tsx (2)
1-1: LGTM: Import statement updated correctly.The removal of
LinksFunctionfrom the import statement is consistent with the changes made to thelinksfunction later in the file. This change helps maintain code cleanliness by removing unused imports.
11-13: Verify the impact of removing Tailwind CSS link.The
linksfunction, which was responsible for including the Tailwind CSS stylesheet, has been commented out. This change may significantly affect the styling of the entire application.
- Could you please clarify the reason for removing the Tailwind CSS link?
- Have alternative methods been implemented to include the necessary styles?
- It's crucial to verify that this change doesn't negatively impact the application's appearance and functionality across all pages.
To ensure no unintended style issues are introduced, please run the following script to check for any remaining Tailwind class usage in the codebase:
If Tailwind classes are still in use but the stylesheet is not being loaded, we may need to reconsider this change or implement an alternative method to include the styles.
libs/auth/src/lucia.ts (1)
11-13:⚠️ Potential issueConsider environment-specific security settings
The change from environment-based to a hardcoded
truevalue for thesecureattribute might impact local development. While settingsecure: trueis generally good for production, it may cause issues in non-HTTPS local environments.Consider the following recommendations:
- Implement the TODO to use
@cuhacking/envfor managing environment variables.- Maintain environment-specific settings for the
secureattribute.Here's a potential implementation:
import { envWebsiteServer } from '@cuhacking/env' // ... sessionCookie: { attributes: { secure: envWebsiteServer.NODE_ENV === 'production', }, },To verify the impact of this change, let's check for any local development scripts or documentation that might be affected:
Please review the script output to ensure this change doesn't break local development processes.
✅ Verification successful
Secure attribute setting verified
The hardcoded
secure: truedoes not impact local development environments based on the current analysis.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for local development scripts and documentation # Search for local development scripts echo "Searching for local development scripts:" rg --type=shell -i "local|dev|development" -g "*.sh" # Search for development-related documentation echo "Searching for development-related documentation:" rg --type=markdown -i "local|dev|development" -g "*.md"Length of output: 2191
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for local development scripts and documentation # Search for local development shell scripts by targeting common extensions echo "Searching for local development shell scripts:" rg -i "local|dev|development" -g "*.sh" # Search for development-related documentation echo "Searching for development-related documentation:" rg -i "local|dev|development" -g "*.md"Length of output: 2293
apps/website/vite.config.ts (3)
1-5: LGTM: Import statements are appropriate and aligned with project requirements.The import statements are well-structured and include all necessary modules for Vite configuration, Remix integration, and Netlify deployment. The use of
node:pathdemonstrates adherence to modern Node.js import practices.
7-8: LGTM: Configuration structure and plugins are well-defined.The use of
defineConfigensures type safety for the configuration object. The included plugins (remix, netlifyPlugin, and tsconfigPaths) are appropriate for a Remix project deployed to Netlify with TypeScript support. The order of plugins is correct, which is crucial for proper Vite configuration.
18-24: LGTM: Build configuration and public directory are well-defined.The build configuration is appropriate:
- The target is set to 'es2022', which is modern and suitable for current browsers.
- External modules are correctly specified to prevent unnecessary bundling.
- The public directory path is correctly set to the website's public folder.
These settings align well with the project structure and deployment requirements.
libs/auth/src/auth.ts (4)
13-14:⚠️ Potential issueReview authentication flow changes and potential security implications
The modifications to the
uncachedAuthfunction have significant implications for the authentication system:
- Setting
sessionIdtonulldisables session validation based on cookies.- The commented-out logic for managing session cookies removes the ability to create, update, or clear sessions.
These changes could lead to:
- Users always being treated as unauthenticated
- Inability to maintain user sessions across requests
- Potential security vulnerabilities if not properly addressed
Please review these changes carefully and consider the following:
- Is this change intentional or a temporary measure?
- How will user authentication be handled without session cookies?
- Are there any security implications that need to be addressed?
To ensure the authentication flow is working as intended, please run the following verification:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any remaining session management logic in the auth module echo "Checking for session management logic:" rg --type typescript 'session|cookie' libs/auth echo "Checking for authentication checks in other parts of the application:" rg --type typescript 'auth\.' appsAlso applies to: 21-26, 29-34
Line range hint
1-44: Conduct a comprehensive security review of the modified authentication systemThe significant changes to the authentication system, including the removal of session management and cookie handling, raise important security considerations:
- The current implementation may not maintain user authentication state properly.
- Without proper session management, the system might be vulnerable to session fixation or other session-related attacks.
- The changes could potentially impact the overall security posture of the application.
To address these concerns:
- Conduct a thorough security review of the new authentication implementation.
- Ensure that the removal of cookie-based sessions doesn't introduce vulnerabilities.
- Verify that all endpoints requiring authentication are still properly protected.
- Consider implementing alternative session management if cookie-based sessions are no longer used.
- Update any security documentation to reflect these changes.
To assist in identifying potential security issues, run the following verification:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Identify potential security concerns in the auth implementation echo "Checking for authentication checks in API routes:" rg --type typescript 'auth.*\(' apps/*/api echo "Checking for usage of secure headers:" rg --type typescript 'headers|setHeader' apps libs echo "Checking for CSRF protection mechanisms:" rg --type typescript 'csrf' apps libs
Line range hint
1-44: Improve code clarity by addressing commented-out codeThe file contains a significant amount of commented-out code, which affects readability and maintainability. While these comments might be temporary due to ongoing changes, it's important to address them:
- For code that will be reimplemented soon, consider using
// TODO: Reimplementationcomments instead of keeping the full implementation commented out.- For code that's no longer needed, remove it entirely to keep the file clean.
- If the commented-out code represents alternative implementations, consider moving them to a separate document or using version control to track these changes.
To improve code clarity:
- Review all commented-out code and decide whether to remove it, replace it with TODO comments, or keep it (with a clear explanation why).
- Ensure that any remaining comments are meaningful and up-to-date.
To help identify all commented-out code in this file, run the following:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Identify commented-out code in auth.ts echo "Commented-out lines in auth.ts:" rg --type typescript '^\s*//.*$' libs/auth/src/auth.ts
43-44:⚠️ Potential issueReview performance implications of removing auth caching
The export of
authhas been changed from a cached version to directly exportinguncachedAuth. This modification has potential performance implications:
- Removing the
cachewrapper means thatauthwill no longer be memoized.- Each call to
authwill now execute the fulluncachedAuthfunction, which could be less efficient if called frequently.Please consider the following:
- Assess the frequency of
authusage throughout the application.- Evaluate if the performance impact of removing caching is acceptable.
- If caching is still needed, consider implementing an alternative caching mechanism that doesn't rely on React's
cachefunction.To understand the usage of
authacross the application, run the following verification:#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for auth usage across the application echo "Checking for auth usage:" rg --type typescript 'auth\(' apps libs echo "Checking for potential high-frequency auth calls:" rg --type typescript 'useEffect.*auth\(' apps libspackage.json (2)
17-19: LGTM: Improved linting scriptsThe changes to the linting scripts look good. The use of
pnpxis consistent with the project's package manager (pnpm), and the addition of thelint:inspect-buildscript enhances the linting capabilities.
63-63: LGTM: DevDependencies additionsThe additions to
devDependenciesare appropriate and align with the project's direction towards Netlify deployment and Vite configuration support.Regarding the past review comment about separating dependency additions:
While it's generally a good practice to separate dependency changes into their own commits, in this case, these additions are closely related to the configuration changes for Netlify deployment, which is the main objective of this PR. Therefore, including them in this commit is acceptable.Also applies to: 118-118, 132-132
apps/website/vite.config.ts
Outdated
| resolve: { | ||
| alias: { | ||
| '@cuhacking/api': path.resolve(__dirname, '../../libs/api/src'), | ||
| '@cuhacking/auth': path.resolve(__dirname, '../../libs/auth/src'), | ||
| '@cuhacking/db': path.resolve(__dirname, '../../libs/api/src'), | ||
| '@cuhacking/utils': path.resolve(__dirname, '../../libs/api/src'), | ||
| '@cuhacking/env': path.resolve(__dirname, '../../libs/api/src'), | ||
| }, | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Incorrect alias paths detected in vite.config.ts.
The resolve aliases are currently pointing all modules to libs/api/src, but each module is located in its respective directory under libs/. Please update the alias paths as follows:
@cuhacking/api:path.resolve(__dirname, '../../libs/api')@cuhacking/auth:path.resolve(__dirname, '../../libs/auth')@cuhacking/db:path.resolve(__dirname, '../../libs/db')@cuhacking/utils:path.resolve(__dirname, '../../libs/utils')@cuhacking/env:path.resolve(__dirname, '../../libs/env')
This ensures that each alias correctly points to its corresponding module directory.
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify the correctness of alias paths.
The resolve aliases provide convenient imports for shared libraries, which is a good practice. However, all aliases currently point to the same directory: '../../libs/api/src'. This might be incorrect if these modules are actually located in different directories.
Please confirm that all these modules (@cuhacking/auth, @cuhacking/db, @cuhacking/utils, @cuhacking/env) are indeed located in the 'libs/api/src' directory. If not, update the paths accordingly.
To verify the module locations, you can run the following script:
Verify the actual locations of the @cuhacking modules.
The current alias paths in vite.config.ts point to libs/api/src, but none of the specified modules (@cuhacking/api, @cuhacking/auth, @cuhacking/db, @cuhacking/utils, @cuhacking/env) exist in that directory. Please verify the correct locations of these modules by running the following script:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the existence of @cuhacking modules in the specified directory
modules=("api" "auth" "db" "utils" "env")
base_path="libs/api/src"
for module in "${modules[@]}"; do
if [ -d "$base_path/$module" ]; then
echo "@cuhacking/$module exists in $base_path"
else
echo "@cuhacking/$module does not exist in $base_path"
fi
done
Length of output: 889
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Locate the directories of @cuhacking modules
modules=("api" "auth" "db" "utils" "env")
search_base="libs"
for module in "${modules[@]}"; do
path=$(fd --type d --max-depth 4 "^${module}$" "$search_base")
if [ -n "$path" ]; then
echo "@cuhacking/$module found at $path"
else
echo "@cuhacking/$module not found in $search_base"
fi
done
Length of output: 1031
| // TODO: Implement cache & cookies back, attempt without using next - website should build successfully | ||
|
|
||
| // import { cache } from 'react' | ||
| // import { cookies } from 'next/headers' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Active usage of cookies detected
The following files still use cookies:
libs/auth/src/actions/logout.tsimport { cookies } from 'next/headers'cookies().set(
Additionally, there are commented-out lines related to cache and cookies in libs/auth/src/auth.ts.
Please address the active cookies usage to ensure consistency with the TODO:
- Reimplement or remove the
cookiesfunctionality as intended. - Clean up any unnecessary commented-out code to maintain codebase cleanliness.
🔗 Analysis chain
Address TODO and review the need for commented-out imports
The TODO comment indicates that cache and cookies functionality needs to be reimplemented. This change seems to be a temporary measure to resolve build issues.
- Please create a separate issue to track the reimplementation of cache and cookies functionality.
- Once the issue is created, update the TODO comment with the issue number for better traceability.
- Review the commented-out imports for
cacheandcookies. If they are no longer needed, consider removing them entirely to keep the codebase clean.
To ensure this change doesn't introduce unintended side effects, please run the following verification:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any remaining usage of cache and cookies in the auth module
echo "Checking for cache usage:"
rg --type typescript 'cache\(' libs/auth
echo "Checking for cookies usage:"
rg --type typescript 'cookies\(' libs/auth
echo "Checking for other files importing cache or cookies:"
rg --type typescript "import.*(?:cache|cookies).*from ['\"](react|next/headers)['\"]" libs/auth
Length of output: 783
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any remaining usage of cache and cookies in the auth module
echo "Checking for cache usage:"
rg 'cache\(' libs/auth --type ts --type tsx
echo "Checking for cookies usage:"
rg 'cookies\(' libs/auth --type ts --type tsx
echo "Checking for other files importing cache or cookies:"
rg "import.*(?:cache|cookies).*from ['\"](react|next/headers)['\"]" libs/auth --type ts --type tsx
Length of output: 523
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any remaining usage of cache and cookies in the auth module
echo "Checking for cache usage in TypeScript files:"
fd -e ts -e tsx . libs/auth | xargs rg 'cache\('
echo "Checking for cookies usage in TypeScript files:"
fd -e ts -e tsx . libs/auth | xargs rg 'cookies\('
echo "Checking for imports of cache or cookies from react or next/headers in TypeScript files:"
fd -e ts -e tsx . libs/auth | xargs rg "import.*(?:cache|cookies).*from ['\"](react|next/headers)['\"]"
Length of output: 1101
| if (typeof window === 'undefined') { | ||
| return createQueryClient() | ||
| } | ||
| return (clientQueryClientSingleton ??= createQueryClient()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Avoid assignment within return statement for better readability
Assigning a value within the return statement can reduce code clarity and make debugging more difficult. On line 25, the assignment of clientQueryClientSingleton happens within the return statement. Consider separating the assignment from the return statement to improve readability.
Apply this diff to enhance code clarity:
function getQueryClient() {
if (typeof window === 'undefined') {
return createQueryClient()
}
- return (clientQueryClientSingleton ??= createQueryClient())
+ if (!clientQueryClientSingleton) {
+ clientQueryClientSingleton = createQueryClient()
+ }
+ return clientQueryClientSingleton
}📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| return (clientQueryClientSingleton ??= createQueryClient()) | |
| function getQueryClient() { | |
| if (typeof window === 'undefined') { | |
| return createQueryClient() | |
| } | |
| if (!clientQueryClientSingleton) { | |
| clientQueryClientSingleton = createQueryClient() | |
| } | |
| return clientQueryClientSingleton | |
| } |
🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome
[error] 25-25: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
| /* eslint-disable unicorn/prefer-node-protocol */ | ||
| import process from 'process' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove unnecessary ESLint disable comment and 'process' import
The 'process' module is a Node.js module and is not available in the browser environment. Importing it in client-side code can cause bundling issues. Since process.env is accessible globally in Next.js, you can remove the import statement. Additionally, the ESLint disable comment is no longer needed after removing the import.
Apply this diff to remove the unnecessary import and ESLint comment:
-'use client'
-/* eslint-disable unicorn/prefer-node-protocol */
-import process from 'process'
+import { useState } from 'react'
import { QueryClient, QueryClientProvider } from '@tanstack/react-query'Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
JowiAoun
changed the title
JowiAoun
force-pushed
the
jowi/build/136-deploy-to-netlify
branch
from
c224acc to
2b0dd2f
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (5)
apps/docs/netlify.toml (1)
1-3: Approve publish directory and suggest improvements to build configuration.The publish directory is correctly set for the docs application. However, consider the following improvements:
Add a
baseproperty to specify the docs app directory:base = "apps/docs/"Consider using the nx-based install command for consistency:
command = "pnpm nx run-many --target=install && pnpm nx build docs"The Playwright installation step is missing from the build command. If it's required, add it back:
command = "pnpm nx run-many --target=install && pnpm exec playwright install && pnpm nx build docs"These changes will make the build process more specific to the docs app and consistent with the monorepo structure.
libs/auth/src/auth.ts (1)
Line range hint
1-44: Comprehensive review of authentication system changesThe modifications to this file significantly alter the authentication system:
- Cookie-based session management has been disabled.
- Caching of authentication results has been removed.
- The system currently doesn't maintain user sessions effectively.
These changes, while allowing the build to succeed, have created a non-functional authentication system. To address this:
- Create a detailed roadmap for restoring full authentication functionality, including:
- Session management
- Caching mechanisms
- Secure cookie handling
- Implement proper error handling and user notifications for authentication failures.
- Consider adding feature flags to easily toggle between the current implementation and the restored functionality for testing purposes.
- Update all relevant documentation to reflect the current state of the authentication system and any temporary workarounds implemented.
- Prioritize the completion of this task to minimize the period during which the system operates with reduced functionality.
Given the critical nature of authentication in your application, consider forming a dedicated task force to expedite the reimplementation of these features. This team should focus on both immediate stopgap measures and long-term, robust solutions.
apps/docs/src/content/docs/contribution-guidelines/index.mdx (3)
334-343: Consider moving the Playwright warning earlier in the "Steps" section.The newly added warning about Playwright browsers installation is crucial information for contributors. However, its current placement at the end of the "Steps" section might be overlooked by users focused on the initial setup process.
Consider moving this callout earlier in the "Steps" section, possibly after the step where dependencies are installed. This would ensure that contributors are aware of this requirement before they start running any project-specific commands.
344-344: Excellent addition of Nx commands explanation.The new accordion section providing detailed information about Nx commands syntax is a valuable addition to the documentation. It covers various aspects of Nx usage, including running tasks, multiple targets, filtering projects, and even touches on production builds and CI setup. The inclusion of visual aids enhances the explanation.
Consider adding a brief introduction before the accordion to give users context about why Nx commands are important in this project. This could help newcomers understand the relevance of this information.
344-344: Reconsider the "Final Step" section.While the addition of a lighthearted "Final Step" can create a friendly atmosphere, it doesn't provide any substantial information to the contributors.
Consider either:
- Removing this section to maintain a more professional tone throughout the documentation.
- Modifying it to include a meaningful final step, such as encouraging contributors to join a community channel or to review the next steps for contribution.
This would ensure that every part of the documentation provides value to the readers.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (7)
- apps/docs/netlify.toml (1 hunks)
- apps/docs/src/content/docs/contribution-guidelines/index.mdx (1 hunks)
- apps/website/app/root.tsx (2 hunks)
- apps/website/app/routes/_index.tsx (1 hunks)
- apps/website/package.json (1 hunks)
- libs/auth/src/auth.ts (3 hunks)
- libs/auth/src/lucia.ts (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (4)
- apps/website/app/root.tsx
- apps/website/app/routes/_index.tsx
- apps/website/package.json
- libs/auth/src/lucia.ts
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (3)
apps/docs/netlify.toml (2)
5-7: Dev configuration looks good.The dev command and publish directory are correctly set for the docs application. The use of
pnpm nx dev docsis consistent with the project's nx-based structure.
9-10: Node.js version looks good, but verify compatibility.Setting NODE_VERSION to 20.0.0 is a good choice for a recent LTS version. However, it's important to ensure this version is compatible with all dependencies used in the docs application.
To verify compatibility, you can run the following script:
This script will help identify any potential compatibility issues with the specified Node.js version.
✅ Verification successful
Node.js version 20.0.0 is set correctly and appears compatible with the project's dependencies.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check if the specified Node.js version is compatible with the project's dependencies. # Test: Check the engines field in package.json for Node.js version constraints echo "Checking Node.js version constraints in package.json:" jq '.engines.node' apps/docs/package.json # Test: List any dependencies that might have issues with Node.js 20.0.0 echo "Dependencies that might have issues with Node.js 20.0.0:" npm ls --json | jq '.dependencies | to_entries[] | select(.value.engines != null) | select(.value.engines.node != null) | select(.value.engines.node | contains("20.0.0") | not) | {name: .key, version: .value.version, nodeConstraint: .value.engines.node}'Length of output: 691
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Find all package.json files related to the docs application and check Node.js version constraints. # Find all package.json files within the repository echo "Searching for package.json files related to the docs application:" fd "package.json" . > package_json_files.txt # Display the found package.json file paths cat package_json_files.txt # Extract the engines.node field from each found package.json echo "Extracting Node.js version constraints from each package.json:" while read -r file; do echo "File: $file" jq '.engines.node // "No Node.js version specified"' "$file" echo "" done < package_json_files.txtLength of output: 2683
libs/auth/src/auth.ts (1)
1-4: Address TODO and review commented-out importsThe TODO comment and commented-out imports indicate that this is a temporary solution. As mentioned in a previous review:
- Create a separate issue to track the reimplementation of cache and cookies functionality.
- Update the TODO comment with the issue number for better traceability.
- Review the commented-out imports for
cacheandcookies. If they are no longer needed, consider removing them entirely to keep the codebase clean.To ensure no unintended side effects, please run the following verification script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any remaining usage of cache and cookies in the auth module echo "Checking for cache usage in TypeScript files:" fd -e ts -e tsx . libs/auth | xargs rg 'cache\(' echo "Checking for cookies usage in TypeScript files:" fd -e ts -e tsx . libs/auth | xargs rg 'cookies\(' echo "Checking for imports of cache or cookies from react or next/headers in TypeScript files:" fd -e ts -e tsx . libs/auth | xargs rg "import.*(?:cache|cookies).*from ['\"](react|next/headers)['\"]"
| // const sessionCookie = lucia.createSessionCookie(result.session.id) | ||
| // cookies().set( | ||
| // sessionCookie.name, | ||
| // sessionCookie.value, | ||
| // sessionCookie.attributes, | ||
| // ) | ||
| } | ||
| if (!result.session) { | ||
| const sessionCookie = lucia.createBlankSessionCookie() | ||
| cookies().set( | ||
| sessionCookie.name, | ||
| sessionCookie.value, | ||
| sessionCookie.attributes, | ||
| ) | ||
| // const sessionCookie = lucia.createBlankSessionCookie() | ||
| // cookies().set( | ||
| // sessionCookie.name, | ||
| // sessionCookie.value, | ||
| // sessionCookie.attributes, | ||
| // ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Address removal of session cookie management
The commented-out code for managing session cookies has several implications:
- Session persistence across page reloads or multiple tabs is likely broken.
- The application may not be able to maintain user authentication state properly.
- Features relying on persistent authentication might malfunction.
To address this:
- Document the current state of authentication in the project README or relevant documentation.
- Create a detailed plan for reimplementing session management, considering:
- Security implications of the new implementation
- Compatibility with the current application architecture
- Performance impacts of the chosen solution
- Implement proper error handling for authentication failures due to missing session management.
Consider implementing a temporary in-memory session store as an intermediate solution while working on the full reimplementation. This could help maintain basic session functionality without relying on cookies.
| // export const auth = cache(uncachedAuth) | ||
| export const auth = uncachedAuth |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Review performance impact of removing auth caching
The change from cache(uncachedAuth) to directly exporting uncachedAuth removes the caching layer for authentication. This modification:
- May increase the frequency of authentication checks, potentially impacting performance.
- Could lead to increased load on the authentication backend if not managed properly.
To address these concerns:
- Implement performance monitoring to track the frequency and duration of authentication calls.
- Consider adding a temporary, simple caching mechanism (e.g., using a Map with expiration) to mitigate potential performance issues.
- Plan for reimplementing a more robust caching solution as part of the TODO for cache functionality.
Here's a simple in-memory caching implementation you could consider as a temporary measure:
const authCache = new Map<string, {result: any, expiry: number}>();
const CACHE_TTL = 5 * 60 * 1000; // 5 minutes
export const auth = async () => {
const cacheKey = 'current_auth'; // You might want to use a more specific key if needed
const cached = authCache.get(cacheKey);
if (cached && cached.expiry > Date.now()) {
return cached.result;
}
const result = await uncachedAuth();
authCache.set(cacheKey, {result, expiry: Date.now() + CACHE_TTL});
return result;
};This implementation provides a basic caching mechanism while you work on a more comprehensive solution.
| // const sessionId = cookies().get(lucia.sessionCookieName)?.value ?? null | ||
| const sessionId = null |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Issues found with disabling session validation
The change from retrieving sessionId from cookies to setting it to null in libs/auth/src/auth.ts effectively disables session validation. This has significant implications:
- Authentication Breakdown: Calling
lucia.validateSession(sessionId)withsessionIdasnullmay result in failed session validations, leading to authentication issues. - Potential Errors: Functions relying on a valid
sessionIdmay encounter errors or behave unpredictably whensessionIdisnull. - User Experience Impact: Users may be required to log in repeatedly or experience restricted access due to the inability to validate sessions.
Recommendations:
- Review the Change's Intent: Ensure that setting
sessionIdtonullis a temporary measure and not intended for production. - Implement Proper Error Handling: Modify
lucia.validateSessionto gracefully handlenullvalues or ensuresessionIdis appropriately managed. - Update Dependent Code: Verify and update any parts of the codebase that assume a valid
sessionIdto prevent unexpected behavior. - Plan for Restoration: Develop a strategy to reinstate proper session management once cache and cookies functionality is reimplemented.
🔗 Analysis chain
Review impact of disabling session validation
The change from retrieving sessionId from cookies to setting it to null effectively disables session validation. This has significant implications:
- Users will always be treated as not having a session, potentially forcing them to log in repeatedly.
- Any functionality relying on persistent sessions may be broken.
While this change aligns with the TODO for reimplementing cache and cookies, it's crucial to:
- Ensure this is a temporary measure and not pushed to production as-is.
- Update any dependent code that expects session persistence.
- Plan for a quick resolution to restore proper session management.
To assess the impact, please run the following verification:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for usage of sessionId in the auth module and related files
echo "Checking for sessionId usage in auth module:"
rg 'sessionId' libs/auth --type ts --type tsx
echo "Checking for session-related functionality in other modules:"
rg 'session|auth' apps --type ts --type tsx
Length of output: 377
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for usage of sessionId in the auth module and related files
echo "Checking for sessionId usage in auth module:"
rg 'sessionId' libs/auth -g "*.ts" -g "*.tsx"
echo "Checking for session-related functionality in other modules:"
rg 'session|auth' apps -g "*.ts" -g "*.tsx"
Length of output: 4394
JowiAoun
force-pushed
the
jowi/build/136-deploy-to-netlify
branch
from
2b0dd2f to
b6a65c5
Compare
JowiAoun
force-pushed
the
jowi/build/136-deploy-to-netlify
branch
from
b6a65c5 to
d4d8c13
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
apps/docs/netlify.toml (1)
10-11: Consider using a more specific Node.js version.While using Node.js 20.0.0 is good for leveraging recent features and improvements, it's generally recommended to use a more specific patch version for better build reproducibility.
Consider updating to the latest patch version of Node.js 20, for example:
[build.environment] -NODE_VERSION = "20.0.0" +NODE_VERSION = "20.11.1"This ensures you're using the most up-to-date and stable version within the Node.js 20.x line.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
- apps/docs/netlify.toml (1 hunks)
- apps/docs/src/content/docs/contribution-guidelines/index.mdx (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- apps/docs/src/content/docs/contribution-guidelines/index.mdx
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (1)
apps/docs/netlify.toml (1)
6-8: LGTM: Development configuration looks good.The [dev] section is well-configured:
- The dev command correctly uses nx for development.
- The publish directory is consistent with the [build] section.
| [build] | ||
| base = "/" | ||
| publish = "apps/docs/.next" | ||
| command = "pnpm i && pnpm exec playwright install && pnpm nx build docs" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider refining the build configuration for better specificity and consistency.
While the current configuration is functional, there are opportunities for improvement:
-
The
basedirectory is set to "/", which might be too broad if there are multiple apps in the repository. Consider setting it to "/apps/docs/" for better specificity. -
The build command uses
pnpm ifor installing dependencies. For consistency with the monorepo structure, consider usingpnpm nx run-many --target=installinstead.
Here's a suggested improvement:
[build]
-base = "/"
+base = "/apps/docs/"
publish = "apps/docs/.next"
-command = "pnpm i && pnpm exec playwright install && pnpm nx build docs"
+command = "pnpm nx run-many --target=install && pnpm exec playwright install && pnpm nx build docs"These changes ensure that the build process is more specific to the docs app and uses nx commands consistently throughout the monorepo.
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| [build] | |
| base = "/" | |
| publish = "apps/docs/.next" | |
| command = "pnpm i && pnpm exec playwright install && pnpm nx build docs" | |
| [build] | |
| base = "/apps/docs/" | |
| publish = "apps/docs/.next" | |
| command = "pnpm nx run-many --target=install && pnpm exec playwright install && pnpm nx build docs" |
This PR allows us to deploy the following apps to Netlify:
netlify.tomlfiles found in the first two mentioned apps are found within the app directories, and allow to define individual deployment configurations.Additional changes:
docsapp page now has base url/instead of/docsContributors:
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
netlify.tomlconfiguration file for deploying documentation applications on Netlify, streamlining the deployment process.Chores
.gitignoreto include specific environment files and directories.package.jsonto include new scripts for building and starting the website application.