enhancement(landing): link to glossary from footer & github #2684
Conversation
p6l-richard
requested review from
perkinsjr,
chronark,
MichaelUnkey and
mcstepp
as code owners
|
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
|
@p6l-richard is attempting to deploy a commit to the Unkey Team on Vercel. A member of the Team first needs to authorize it. |
📝 Walkthrough📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThis pull request introduces two main changes to the Next.js project. A new section titled "What's new" has been added to the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Warning Rate limit exceeded@p6l-richard has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 10 minutes and 50 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. 📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
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 (
|
|
Hey there and thank you for opening this pull request! 👋🏼 We require pull request titles to follow the Conventional Commits specification and it looks like your proposed title needs to be adjusted. Details: |
![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
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
apps/www/components/footer/footer.tsx (1)
Line range hint
11-43: Consider extracting navigation configurationAs the navigation structure grows with additions like the glossary link, consider extracting the navigation configuration to a separate file. This would:
- Improve maintainability
- Enable reuse in other parts of the application
- Make navigation updates more centralized
Consider creating a new file like
config/navigation.ts:export const siteNavigation = [ { title: "Company", links: [ // ... existing links ], }, // ... other sections ] as const;Then import and use it in the footer:
import { siteNavigation } from "@/config/navigation";
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
apps/www/README.md(1 hunks)apps/www/components/footer/footer.tsx(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- apps/www/README.md
🔇 Additional comments (1)
apps/www/components/footer/footer.tsx (1)
36-40: Verify the external flag usage with relative path
The implementation follows the correct structure and is well-integrated with the existing navigation. However, there's a potential inconsistency:
- The link is marked as
external: truebut uses a relative path/glossary - Other external links in the navigation typically use full URLs (e.g.,
https://...) or special routes
Let's check how other relative paths with external flags are handled:
✅ Verification successful
External flag usage is consistent with codebase patterns
Looking at the search results, the usage of external: true with relative paths is actually a common pattern in the codebase:
/docsis marked as external/githubis marked as external/discordis marked as external
The new glossary link follows this established pattern where special routes with relative paths are marked as external. This is likely intentional for consistent handling of navigation behavior in the application.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for patterns of external links with relative paths
rg --type tsx --type jsx -C 2 'external:\s*true' | rg -B 2 'href:\s*"/'
Length of output: 101
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for external links in TypeScript/JavaScript files
rg --type ts --type js --type jsx --type tsx -C 2 'external:\s*true'
Length of output: 98
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for external links in all files
rg -C 2 'external:\s*true'
Length of output: 2874
What does this PR do?
adds glossary link to footer
adds glossary link to github readme
Fixes # (issue)
Type of change
How should this be tested?
glossarylink in the footerChecklist
Required
pnpm buildpnpm fmtconsole.logsgit pull origin mainAppreciated
Summary by CodeRabbit