[WIP] Convert Patcher spec.json usage to temp file usage #2546
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
WalkthroughThis update revises documentation related to the Patcher tool. The main change is in the "Promotion Workflows" guide, updating the handling of the Changes
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (3)
🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
SupportNeed help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions. 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 (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (7)
docs/2.0/docs/patcher/guides/promotion-workflows.md (7)
58-62: Great addition of deprecation guidance!
The new info box clearly warns users to stop checking the spec output into source control. Consider enhancing it by linking to a.gitignoreexample or pointing users to${{ runner.temp }}for runner‐provided temp storage.
122-122: Leverage the GitHub Actions temp directory
Rather than hard-coding/tmp/patcher-spec.json, you can use${{ runner.temp }}/patcher-spec.json. This makes the workflow cross-platform and avoids potential permission issues on non-Linux runners.
145-145: Pin spec_file path for update step
Good update to use a temp file here. As an improvement, consider reusing${{ runner.temp }}so both report and update steps reference the exact same runner-provided directory.
212-212: Use runner temp in stage report job
Same suggestion as above: swap/tmp/patcher-spec.jsonfor${{ runner.temp }}/patcher-spec.jsonto ensure consistency and cross-runner compatibility.
235-235: Stage: update step spec_file path
Consider unifying all temp paths via${{ runner.temp }}/patcher-spec.jsonto avoid hard-coding and to ensure the same file location across jobs.
280-280: Prod: report job spec_file path
As above, using${{ runner.temp }}/patcher-spec.jsonwould align with GitHub Actions best practices and work on any runner.
303-303: Prod: update step spec_file path
Recommend switching to the built-in${{ runner.temp }}directory rather than/tmp, for consistency and broader runner support.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
docs/2.0/docs/patcher/concepts/grouping.md(0 hunks)docs/2.0/docs/patcher/guides/promotion-workflows.md(7 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- docs/2.0/docs/patcher/concepts/grouping.md
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
- GitHub Check: Validate generated content
🔇 Additional comments (3)
docs/2.0/docs/patcher/guides/promotion-workflows.md (3)
137-137: Echo spec output into temp file
This step correctly writes the report output to the temp path. The quoting with single quotes preserves JSON integrity—nice!
228-228: Stage: create spec file in temp
This mirror of the dev step correctly writes to the temp path. Looks good!
296-296: Prod: echo report output
The create-file step is consistent—good job reusing the echo approach.
Modify Patcher documentation to recommend using a temp
spec.jsonfile instead of a checked in fileSummary by CodeRabbit