feat: upgrade ci action version #1080
Conversation
Signed-off-by: “huazhongming” <[email protected]>
WalkthroughThe pull request includes updates to multiple GitHub Actions workflow files, primarily focusing on upgrading the version of the Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant GitHubActions
participant Repository
User->>GitHubActions: Trigger workflow
GitHubActions->>Repository: Checkout code (actions/checkout@v4)
GitHubActions->>Repository: Run jobs (linting, testing, etc.)
GitHubActions->>User: Workflow completed
--- 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
🪧 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 (
|
| File Path | Change Summary |
|---|---|
.github/workflows/codeql-analysis.yml |
Updated actions/checkout from v2 to v4. |
.github/workflows/dead-link-checker.yaml |
Updated actions/checkout from v2 to v4. |
.github/workflows/docusaurus-ci.yml |
Updated actions/setup-node from v1 to v4, actions/checkout from v2 to v4, removed commented-out deployment steps. |
.github/workflows/kube-bot.yaml |
Added pull_request_target trigger, updated actions/checkout from v3 to v4. |
.github/workflows/layotto-ci.yml |
Updated multiple actions: checkout from v2/v3 to v4, setup-go from v2/v3 to v5, golangci-lint from v3 to v6, and Docker actions to v3. |
.github/workflows/layotto-release.yml |
Updated multiple actions: checkout from v2/v3 to v4, setup-go from v2/v3 to v5, golangci-lint from v3 to v6, and Docker actions to v3. |
.github/workflows/license-checker.yml |
Updated actions/checkout from v2 to v4. |
.github/workflows/markdown-checker.yml |
Updated actions/checkout from v2 to v4. |
.github/workflows/proto-checker.yml |
Updated actions/checkout from v2 to v4. |
Sequence Diagram(s)
sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant GitHubActions
participant Repository
User->>GitHubActions: Trigger workflow
GitHubActions->>Repository: Checkout code (actions/checkout@v4)
GitHubActions->>Repository: Run jobs (linting, testing, etc.)
GitHubActions->>User: Workflow completed
🐰 "In the fields of code we hop,
With actions upgraded, we won't stop!
From v2 to v4, we take a leap,
In our burrow, new features we keep!
Hooray for updates, let’s give a cheer,
For smoother workflows, the best of the year!" 🐇✨
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?
🪧 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
@coderabbitaiin 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
@coderabbitaiin 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 pauseto pause the reviews on a PR.@coderabbitai resumeto resume the paused reviews.@coderabbitai reviewto trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.@coderabbitai full reviewto do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.@coderabbitai summaryto regenerate the summary of the PR.@coderabbitai resolveresolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.@coderabbitai configurationto show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.@coderabbitai helpto get help.
Other keywords and placeholders
- Add
@coderabbitai ignoreanywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed. - Add
@coderabbitai summaryto generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description. - Add
@coderabbitaianywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.
CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)
- You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a
.coderabbit.yamlfile to the root of your repository. - Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
- If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation:
# yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json
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.
Signed-off-by: “huazhongming” <[email protected]>
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (7)
.github/workflows/proto-checker.yml (1)
Update buf GitHub Actions to their latest versions
The current workflow uses outdated versions of buf actions. Latest available versions are:
bufbuild/buf-setup-action: v1.47.2 (currently using v1.6.0)bufbuild/buf-lint-action: v1.1.1 (currently using v1.0.0)Consider updating these actions to their latest versions to ensure you're getting the latest features and security updates.
🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
16-24: Consider upgrading other actions for consistencyWhile the checkout action has been upgraded, other actions in this workflow (buf-setup-action@v1 and buf-lint-action@v1) could potentially be upgraded as well for consistency.
Let's check if newer versions are available:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check latest releases for buf actions echo "Checking buf-setup-action latest version:" gh api repos/bufbuild/buf-setup-action/releases/latest --jq .tag_name echo "Checking buf-lint-action latest version:" gh api repos/bufbuild/buf-lint-action/releases/latest --jq .tag_nameLength of output: 341
🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint
[error] 13-13: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
.github/workflows/docusaurus-ci.yml (1)
Line range hint
24-31: Clarify deployment strategyThe workflow has two deployment methods:
- Commented out
peaceiris/actions-gh-pages- Active
cpina/github-action-push-to-another-repositoryThis seems inconsistent. If the
peaceiris/actions-gh-pagesmethod is no longer needed, consider removing the commented code entirely rather than leaving it in place.Apply this diff to clean up the workflow:
- name: creates output run: cd docs/ && npm install && npm run build -# - name: Deploy -# uses: peaceiris/actions-gh-pages@v3 -# with: -# deploy_key: ${{ secrets.ACTIONS_DEPLOY_KEY }} -# external_repository: layotto/layotto.github.io -# publish_dir: docs/build -# publish_branch: main - name: Pushes to another repository.github/workflows/dead-link-checker.yaml (1)
Line range hint
23-43: Consider cleaning up commented codeThe workflow contains multiple commented-out sections related to Docusaurus server setup and alternative link checking approaches. Consider removing these if they're no longer needed to improve workflow maintainability.
-# - name: Install and start docusaurus server -# run: | -# sudo npm install -# sudo npm run build --config docs && nohup npm run serve --config docs & -# - name: Install markdown-link-check -# run: sudo npm install -g markdown-link-check -# - name: Install and start docusaurus server -# run: | -# sudo npm install -# sudo npm run build --config docs && npm run serve --config docs -# - name: Check dead links in all the .md files -# run: make deadlink.github/workflows/codeql-analysis.yml (2)
Line range hint
20-21: Security concern: Remove the HEAD^2 checkout stepThe
git checkout HEAD^2command for pull requests is a known security issue that was deprecated by GitHub. It can potentially expose your workflow to untrusted code.Apply this diff to remove the unsafe checkout:
- - run: git checkout HEAD^2 - if: ${{ github.event_name == 'pull_request' }}
Line range hint
1-53: Consider enhancing the CodeQL configurationSeveral improvements could make this security scanning more effective:
- The workflow currently only runs on a schedule, consider adding
pull_requestandpushtriggers to catch issues earlier- Upgrade CodeQL actions from v1 to the latest v2 for improved analysis
- Explicitly specify the languages to analyze instead of relying on auto-detection
Here's a suggested enhancement:
name: Layotto Env Pipeline 🌊 on: + push: + branches: [ main, master ] + pull_request: + branches: [ main, master ] schedule: - cron: '0 4 * * 5' jobs: analyse: name: CodeQL runs-on: ubuntu-latest steps: - name: Checkout repository uses: actions/checkout@v4 with: fetch-depth: 2 - name: Initialize CodeQL - uses: github/codeql-action/init@v1 + uses: github/codeql-action/init@v2 + with: + languages: go - name: Autobuild - uses: github/codeql-action/autobuild@v1 + uses: github/codeql-action/autobuild@v2 - name: Perform CodeQL Analysis - uses: github/codeql-action/analyze@v1 + uses: github/codeql-action/analyze@v2.github/workflows/layotto-ci.yml (1)
Line range hint
26-60: Consider upgrading Go versionWhile the action versions have been updated, the workflow is still using Go 1.18.x. Consider upgrading to a more recent Go version (e.g., 1.20 or 1.21) to benefit from performance improvements and security fixes.
🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint
[warning] 51-51: wrong indentation: expected 6 but found 4
(indentation)
.github/workflows/layotto-release.yml (1)
56-56: Fix formatting issuesThere are several formatting issues that should be addressed:
- Line 56: Incorrect indentation (4 spaces instead of 6)
- Lines 275, 298, and 327: Trailing spaces after
docker/login-action@v3- - uses: actions/checkout@v4 + - uses: actions/checkout@v4 - uses: docker/login-action@v3 + uses: docker/login-action@v3 - uses: docker/login-action@v3 + uses: docker/login-action@v3 - uses: docker/login-action@v3 + uses: docker/login-action@v3Also applies to: 275-275, 298-298, 327-327
🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint
[warning] 56-56: wrong indentation: expected 6 but found 4
(indentation)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (9)
.github/workflows/codeql-analysis.yml(1 hunks).github/workflows/dead-link-checker.yaml(1 hunks).github/workflows/docusaurus-ci.yml(1 hunks).github/workflows/kube-bot.yaml(1 hunks).github/workflows/layotto-ci.yml(16 hunks).github/workflows/layotto-release.yml(16 hunks).github/workflows/license-checker.yml(1 hunks).github/workflows/markdown-checker.yml(1 hunks).github/workflows/proto-checker.yml(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 yamllint
.github/workflows/layotto-ci.yml
[warning] 51-51: wrong indentation: expected 6 but found 4
(indentation)
[warning] 68-68: wrong indentation: expected 6 but found 4
(indentation)
[error] 241-241: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
.github/workflows/layotto-release.yml
[warning] 56-56: wrong indentation: expected 6 but found 4
(indentation)
[error] 275-275: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 298-298: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 327-327: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
🔇 Additional comments (13)
.github/workflows/license-checker.yml (1)
17-17: LGTM! Good practice to upgrade to actions/checkout@v4
The upgrade brings security fixes, performance improvements, and new features.
.github/workflows/markdown-checker.yml (1)
14-14: LGTM! Upgrading actions/checkout is a good practice.
The upgrade from v2 to v4 of actions/checkout aligns with the PR objectives and follows GitHub Actions best practices. This change is part of a broader effort to standardize action versions across workflows.
Let's verify the consistency of checkout action versions across all workflow files:
✅ Verification successful
Confirmed: actions/checkout@v4 is consistently used across all workflows
The verification shows that all workflows in the repository are using actions/checkout@v4. This upgrade is complete and consistent, maintaining uniformity across the entire CI/CD infrastructure.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any remaining older versions of actions/checkout
# Expected: All workflows should use v4
echo "Checking for older versions of actions/checkout..."
rg "uses: actions/checkout@(v1|v2|v3)" .github/workflows/
Length of output: 170
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's verify all checkout action versions in workflows
echo "Checking all versions of actions/checkout..."
rg "uses: actions/checkout@" .github/workflows/
Length of output: 2860
.github/workflows/proto-checker.yml (1)
14-14: LGTM! Upgrading actions/checkout is a good practice.
The upgrade from v2 to v4 of actions/checkout aligns with security best practices and the PR's objective. This change is part of a consistent effort across multiple workflow files.
Let's verify if there are any breaking changes in v4 that need attention:
✅ Verification successful
Consider upgrading other actions to their latest versions
The upgrade of actions/checkout to v4 is good, but I notice other actions could also be upgraded:
bufbuild/buf-setup-actioncan be upgraded from v1 to v1.47.2bufbuild/buf-lint-actionis at v1 and can be upgraded to v1.1.1
These upgrades would maintain consistency with the PR's objective of updating CI action versions.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check the changelog of actions/checkout v4 for breaking changes
gh api repos/actions/checkout/releases/tags/v4.0.0 --jq .body
Length of output: 341
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the current versions of other actions in the proto-checker workflow
cat .github/workflows/proto-checker.yml
Length of output: 516
.github/workflows/docusaurus-ci.yml (1)
13-15: Verify Node.js version compatibility
The upgrade to actions/setup-node@v4 is good, but the specific Node.js version 18.20.3 should be verified for compatibility with your Docusaurus setup.
Let's verify the Node.js version requirements:
✅ Verification successful
Node.js version 18.20.3 is compatible with requirements
Based on the package.json files found in the repository, the Node.js version requirements are:
- One package requires
"node": ">=18.0" - Another package requires
"node": ">=16.14.0"
The specified Node.js version 18.20.3 in the workflow satisfies both requirements, making it a suitable choice for the CI environment.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check Node.js version requirements for Docusaurus
# Check package.json for any engine constraints
fd package.json --exec cat {} | jq -r '.engines // empty'
# Check if there's a .nvmrc file specifying Node version
fd .nvmrc --exec cat {}
Length of output: 138
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check Docusaurus dependencies and version to understand Node.js requirements better
# Find Docusaurus package.json files and their content
fd -g "*docusaurus*/package.json" --exec cat {}
# Also check the root package.json for Docusaurus dependencies
fd "^package.json$" -d 1 --exec cat {} | jq -r '.dependencies["@docusaurus/core"] // .devDependencies["@docusaurus/core"] // empty'
Length of output: 187
.github/workflows/dead-link-checker.yaml (1)
21-21: LGTM! Good upgrade to actions/checkout@v4
The upgrade to v4 brings security improvements and better performance. This change aligns with GitHub's best practices for Actions.
.github/workflows/codeql-analysis.yml (1)
14-14: LGTM on the checkout action upgrade!
The upgrade to actions/checkout@v4 is a good improvement that brings better performance and security features.
.github/workflows/kube-bot.yaml (2)
95-95: LGTM: actions/checkout version upgrade
The upgrade to actions/checkout@v4 is appropriate and aligns with best practices:
- Latest major version with security improvements
- No breaking changes affecting this workflow
- Consistent with the PR objective
Line range hint 20-23: Verify security implications of pull_request_target
The addition of pull_request_target is appropriate for bot interactions, but requires careful consideration:
- It runs with repository token permissions
- Current usage is safe as it only handles PR opened events
- Permissions are properly scoped in the workflow
Let's verify no sensitive operations are performed in this workflow:
✅ Verification successful
The pull_request_target usage is secure and appropriate
After reviewing the complete workflow file, the usage of pull_request_target is safe because:
- The workflow only processes PR open events to send a welcome message
- It uses a third-party action (Xunzhuo/prowox) in a controlled manner with specific environment variables
- No checkout of PR code or execution of untrusted code occurs
- The permissions are explicitly defined and scoped appropriately for the bot's functionality
- The workflow only handles metadata (PR number, author, etc.) and doesn't interact with PR contents
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for potentially sensitive operations in the workflow
# Look for checkout of PR head ref or other dangerous patterns
rg -i "ref:|sha:" .github/workflows/kube-bot.yaml
rg -i "script:|run:" .github/workflows/kube-bot.yaml
Length of output: 106
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the full workflow file content to verify security implications
cat .github/workflows/kube-bot.yaml
Length of output: 5839
.github/workflows/layotto-ci.yml (5)
131-131: LGTM on artifact handling upgrades
The upgrade to actions/upload-artifact@v4 is consistent across all artifact jobs and maintains proper error handling with if-no-files-found: error.
Also applies to: 153-153, 175-175, 197-197
324-326: LGTM on Helm chart job updates
The updates to checkout and login actions in the Helm chart job are appropriate and maintain existing functionality.
Line range hint 1-334: Overall LGTM with suggestions
The action version upgrades are consistent throughout the workflow and align well with the PR objectives. While the changes look good, consider:
- Upgrading the Go version to a more recent release
- Verifying the status of WASM stabilization
- Testing Docker action compatibility with the current setup
The workflow structure and functionality are properly maintained.
236-238: Verify Docker action compatibility
The upgrade of Docker-related actions (setup-qemu-action@v3, setup-buildx-action@v3) should be verified for compatibility with the current Docker setup.
Also applies to: 261-263, 297-299
✅ Verification successful
Docker actions upgrade is consistent and compatible
The verification shows that the Docker-related actions have been consistently upgraded across both CI and release workflows:
- All instances of
setup-qemu-actionandsetup-buildx-actionare using v3 - The associated
docker/login-actionis also consistently using v3 - The Docker authentication setup using
DOCKERHUB_USERNAMEandDOCKERHUB_TOKENsecrets remains properly configured
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for any Docker-related issues or discussions
gh issue list --label docker
gh pr list --label docker
# Check Makefile for Docker commands
rg "docker" Makefile
Length of output: 79
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for Docker-related configurations and usage patterns
rg -A 5 "docker/setup-qemu-action|docker/setup-buildx-action" .github/workflows/
# Check for any Docker-related environment variables or configurations
rg "DOCKER|docker" .github/workflows/
# Look for Docker build or push commands to understand the Docker workflow
rg "docker build|docker push" .github/workflows/
Length of output: 6820
Line range hint 216-227: Verify status of WASM stabilization
There's a TODO comment regarding WASM commands stabilization. Since we're updating the workflow, it would be good to verify if this can now be enabled or if there's a timeline for stabilization.
What this PR does:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Bug Fixes
Chores
actions/checkout,actions/setup-go, andgolangci/golangci-lint-action, among others, ensuring compatibility and access to new features.