Skip to content

Conversation

@alexey-yarmosh
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 16, 2025

Walkthrough

This pull request refactors CI/CD workflows and environment configuration management. It removes temporary Corepack workarounds that installed pnpm globally from both the ci.yml and e2e.yml workflows, relying instead on existing Corepack state. The package.json test script for E2E Dash building is updated to reference a new environment file path (.env.scripts.e2e). The build-directus.sh script is modified to copy and use new environment file variants (.env.docker.e2e and .env.scripts.e2e) instead of the previous ones, with environment variable substitutions applied to the new .env.scripts.e2e file.

Possibly related PRs

  • build: add e2e scripts to package.json #121: Directly modifies the same E2E testing infrastructure including package.json scripts, workflows, and build-directus.sh, establishing the foundation that this PR builds upon.

Suggested reviewers

  • MartinKolarik

Poem

🔧 The workarounds fade away,
Corepack now leads the way,
Env files find their rightful place,
CI/CD flows with newfound grace! ✨

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)
Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Description Check ❓ Inconclusive The absence of a pull request description provides no context or details about the changes, making it too vague to assess alignment with the updates. Please add a brief description outlining the problem being solved, the main changes made, and any relevant context to help reviewers understand the intent of this pull request.
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Title Check ✅ Passed The title fix: support new .env files clearly summarizes the main change of updating workflows and scripts to handle renamed environment files.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changes. Docstring coverage check skipped.
✨ Finishing touches
  • 📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch wait-on

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.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

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: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
package.json (1)

20-20: Make env resolution resilient by layering defaults

If .env.scripts.e2e lacks some keys, the build may fail. Load the root .env first and let the e2e file override.

-    "test:e2e:build:dash": "dotenv -e test/e2e/globalping-dash-directus/.env.scripts.e2e -- pnpm build",
+    "test:e2e:build:dash": "dotenv -e .env -e test/e2e/globalping-dash-directus/.env.scripts.e2e -- pnpm build",
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 2c9c0be and 28a5184.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • .github/workflows/ci.yml (0 hunks)
  • .github/workflows/e2e.yml (0 hunks)
  • package.json (1 hunks)
  • scripts/build-directus.sh (1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (2)
  • .github/workflows/e2e.yml
  • .github/workflows/ci.yml
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
  • GitHub Check: Run e2e tests
🔇 Additional comments (1)
scripts/build-directus.sh (1)

27-29: Defensive practices recommended, but external repo files cannot be verified from this sandbox

The script correctly clones https://github.com/jsdelivr/globalping-dash-directus.git into test/e2e/globalping-dash-directus and then runs the copy and perl commands within that cloned repo. The .env files are sourced from the external repository, not the current one.

Your suggestions for guarded copies and robust key replacement are sound defensive practices. However, verification requires checking the external repository's structure, which is beyond the sandbox scope.

@MartinKolarik MartinKolarik merged commit 6d4b696 into master Oct 16, 2025
19 of 22 checks passed
@MartinKolarik MartinKolarik deleted the wait-on branch October 16, 2025 11:21
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.

3 participants