Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

chore(devcontainer): update image: ebcc23d #2728

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

tarrencev
Copy link
Contributor

@tarrencev tarrencev commented Nov 26, 2024

Automated changes by create-pull-request GitHub action

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Updated Docker image version across various workflows and development environments to enhance performance and compatibility.
  • Improvements

    • Enhanced build and test processes by managing binary artifacts more effectively.
  • Bug Fixes

    • No specific bug fixes were noted in this release.

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 26, 2024

Walkthrough

Ohayo, sensei! This pull request primarily updates the Docker image version used in various configuration files related to a Rust development environment and CI workflows. The image reference has been changed from ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:v1.0.2 to ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:ebcc23d. Additionally, the CI workflow has been enhanced with new steps for managing binary artifacts and testing, while the overall structure and functionality of the configurations remain unchanged.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
.devcontainer/devcontainer.json Updated Docker image from v1.0.2 to ebcc23d.
.github/workflows/bench.yml Updated Docker image in bench-katana and bench-sozo jobs from v1.0.2 to ebcc23d.
.github/workflows/ci.yml Updated Docker image across multiple jobs from v1.0.2 to ebcc23d; added steps for binary management.
.github/workflows/release-dispatch.yml Updated Docker image in propose-release job from v1.0.2 to ebcc23d.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • kariy: Recommended for review due to expertise in Docker configurations and CI workflows.

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
.github/workflows/ci.yml (1)

Line range hint 184-201: Consider adding fee-enabled test scenarios

The new test-hurl job is a great addition for API testing! However, running Katana with --dev.no-fee might miss potential fee-related issues.

Consider adding another test scenario with fees enabled to ensure comprehensive coverage of real-world scenarios. Here's a suggested approach:

- nohup /tmp/bins/katana --dev --dev.accounts 2 --dev.no-fee &
+ # Run two scenarios: one with fees and one without
+ nohup /tmp/bins/katana --dev --dev.accounts 2 --dev.no-fee &
+ KATANA_PID=$!
+ hurl --test examples/rpc/**/*.hurl
+ kill $KATANA_PID
+ nohup /tmp/bins/katana --dev --dev.accounts 2 &
🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)

32-32: label "ubuntu-latest-32-cores" is unknown. available labels are "windows-latest", "windows-latest-8-cores", "windows-2022", "windows-2019", "ubuntu-latest", "ubuntu-latest-4-cores", "ubuntu-latest-8-cores", "ubuntu-latest-16-cores", "ubuntu-24.04", "ubuntu-22.04", "ubuntu-20.04", "macos-latest", "macos-latest-xl", "macos-latest-xlarge", "macos-latest-large", "macos-15-xlarge", "macos-15-large", "macos-15", "macos-14-xl", "macos-14-xlarge", "macos-14-large", "macos-14", "macos-13-xl", "macos-13-xlarge", "macos-13-large", "macos-13", "macos-12-xl", "macos-12-xlarge", "macos-12-large", "macos-12", "self-hosted", "x64", "arm", "arm64", "linux", "macos", "windows". if it is a custom label for self-hosted runner, set list of labels in actionlint.yaml config file

(runner-label)


36-36: the runner of "actions/checkout@v3" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue

(action)

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between ebcc23d and 4d1f7cb.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • .devcontainer/devcontainer.json (1 hunks)
  • .github/workflows/bench.yml (2 hunks)
  • .github/workflows/ci.yml (7 hunks)
  • .github/workflows/release-dispatch.yml (1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
  • .devcontainer/devcontainer.json
  • .github/workflows/bench.yml
🔇 Additional comments (2)
.github/workflows/release-dispatch.yml (1)

17-17: Ohayo sensei! The image update looks good!

The change from a semantic version to a specific commit hash (ebcc23d) follows CI/CD best practices by ensuring exact reproducibility of the build environment.

Let's verify the image exists and is properly tagged:

.github/workflows/ci.yml (1)

Line range hint 13-21: Ohayo sensei! Excellent binary artifact management

The addition of binary artifact management is a great improvement that:

  • Builds binaries once and reuses them across jobs
  • Reduces overall CI execution time
  • Ensures consistent binary versions across all tests
🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)

32-32: label "ubuntu-latest-32-cores" is unknown. available labels are "windows-latest", "windows-latest-8-cores", "windows-2022", "windows-2019", "ubuntu-latest", "ubuntu-latest-4-cores", "ubuntu-latest-8-cores", "ubuntu-latest-16-cores", "ubuntu-24.04", "ubuntu-22.04", "ubuntu-20.04", "macos-latest", "macos-latest-xl", "macos-latest-xlarge", "macos-latest-large", "macos-15-xlarge", "macos-15-large", "macos-15", "macos-14-xl", "macos-14-xlarge", "macos-14-large", "macos-14", "macos-13-xl", "macos-13-xlarge", "macos-13-large", "macos-13", "macos-12-xl", "macos-12-xlarge", "macos-12-large", "macos-12", "self-hosted", "x64", "arm", "arm64", "linux", "macos", "windows". if it is a custom label for self-hosted runner, set list of labels in actionlint.yaml config file

(runner-label)


36-36: the runner of "actions/checkout@v3" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue

(action)

@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ jobs:
needs: ensure-docker
runs-on: ubuntu-latest-32-cores
container:
image: ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:v1.0.2
image: ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:ebcc23d
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codebase verification

Ohayo sensei! The Docker image tag exists but needs updating

The ebcc23d tag exists in the container registry but appears to be an older tag, as evidenced by its position in the chronological list of tags. The latest stable version is v1.0.2. Consider using the latest stable version instead of a commit hash for better version tracking and maintainability.

  • Replace ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:ebcc23d with ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:v1.0.2 in the following files:
    • .github/workflows/ci.yml (lines 34, 59, 126, 142, 157, 166, 175)
🔗 Analysis chain

Ohayo sensei! Verify the Docker image version change

The image version has been changed from a semantic version to a commit hash (ebcc23d) across multiple jobs. While this ensures precise version pinning, it might make version tracking less intuitive.

Also applies to: 59-59, 126-126, 142-142, 157-157, 166-166, 175-175

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Verify if the Docker image exists and is accessible
docker pull ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:ebcc23d 2>/dev/null
if [ $? -eq 0 ]; then
    echo "✓ Image exists and is accessible"
else
    echo "✗ Image not found or not accessible"
fi

# Check image details
docker inspect ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:ebcc23d 2>/dev/null | jq '.[0].Created'

Length of output: 223


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the GitHub Container Registry for available tags
gh api \
  -H "Accept: application/vnd.github+json" \
  -H "X-GitHub-Api-Version: 2022-11-28" \
  /orgs/dojoengine/packages/container/dojo-dev/versions --paginate | jq -r '.[].metadata.container.tags[]' 2>/dev/null

# Also check the workflow file history to see when this image tag was introduced
git log -p --no-merges -S "ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:ebcc23d" -- .github/workflows/ci.yml

Length of output: 4939

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 26, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 56.23%. Comparing base (ebcc23d) to head (4d1f7cb).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2728      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   56.24%   56.23%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         415      415              
  Lines       53241    53241              
==========================================
- Hits        29948    29941       -7     
- Misses      23293    23300       +7     

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

@glihm
Copy link
Collaborator

glihm commented Nov 27, 2024

Not needed nothing has changed. Only the commit name.

@glihm glihm closed this Nov 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants