-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
fix(nano-staged): clarify correct engines field due to 1stg/prettier-config
#388
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
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 396e436 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 3 packages
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Pull Request Overview
This PR updates the supported Node.js versions for nano-staged to match the requirements introduced by 1stg/prettier-config and adds a corresponding changeset entry.
- Bumps the
engines.nodefield inpackages/nano-staged/package.json. - Adds a
.changesetfile to document the fix.
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| packages/nano-staged/package.json | Updated node engine ranges to ^18.18.0 || ^20.9.0 || >=21.1.0 |
| .changeset/rotten-clocks-know.md | Added changeset noting the engine field clarification |
|
Warning Rate limit exceeded@JounQin has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 9 minutes and 26 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. 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. 🪧 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 (
|
|
This pull request is automatically built and testable in CodeSandbox. To see build info of the built libraries, click here or the icon next to each commit SHA. |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #388 +/- ##
======================================
Coverage 0.00% 0.00%
======================================
Files 39 39
Lines 278 278
Branches 129 129
======================================
Misses 278 278 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
@1stg/app-config
@1stg/babel-preset
@1stg/browserslist-config
@1stg/commitlint-config
@1stg/common-config
@1stg/config
@1stg/eslint-config
@1stg/markuplint-config
@1stg/nano-staged
@1stg/postcss-config
@1stg/prettier-config
@1stg/remark-preset
@1stg/simple-git-hooks
@1stg/stylelint-config
@1stg/tsconfig
commit: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Important
Looks good to me! 👍
Reviewed everything up to 396e436 in 1 minute and 9 seconds. Click for details.
- Reviewed
26lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
2draft comments. View those below. - Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.
1. .changeset/rotten-clocks-know.md:7
- Draft comment:
Ensure the version bump level matches the semantic nature: a fix normally implies a patch, but this changeset lists 'minor' bumps. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50% While the commit message starts with 'fix:', this doesn't necessarily mean the change must be a patch. The author may have valid reasons for making it a minor version bump, such as if the fix involves new functionality or could be breaking for some users. Without more context about the actual code changes, we can't be certain the minor bump is incorrect. The comment makes a reasonable observation about the apparent mismatch between 'fix:' and 'minor'. Maybe there's important context in the actual code changes that justifies the minor bump? Without seeing the actual code changes, we can't be confident that this should be a patch instead of a minor version bump. Version bumping requires understanding the full context of changes. Delete the comment as it makes assumptions about version bumping without sufficient context to be certain the minor bump is incorrect.
2. packages/nano-staged/package.json:11
- Draft comment:
Verify the new Node engine constraints. Dropping Node 16 support is intentional? Ensure compatibility with dependencies like @1stg/prettier-config. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50% This comment violates multiple rules. It starts with "Verify" which is explicitly discouraged. It asks the author to confirm their intention, which we shouldn't do. It's speculative about dependency compatibility. Node version changes are typically intentional and well-considered. The comment raises a valid concern about breaking changes in dependencies. Maybe this could cause real compatibility issues? Even if there are compatibility concerns, asking for verification isn't helpful. If there were actual known compatibility issues, they should be stated directly with evidence. Delete this comment as it violates our rules by asking for verification and making speculative compatibility concerns without concrete evidence.
Workflow ID: wflow_o2Uc7Lf4Fm14QOIm
You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.
|
Important
Update
engines.nodein@1stg/nano-stagedto specify compatible Node.js versions and add changeset for minor version updates.engines.nodeinpackage.jsonfor@1stg/nano-stagedto^18.18.0 || ^20.9.0 || >=21.1.0.rotten-clocks-know.mdto indicate minor version updates for@1stg/app-config,@1stg/common-config, and@1stg/nano-staged.This description was created by
for 396e436. You can customize this summary. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.