Skip to content

ci: modernize on latest rainix + slim shells#221

Merged
thedavidmeister merged 4 commits into
mainfrom
2026-05-23-modernize-rainix
May 23, 2026
Merged

ci: modernize on latest rainix + slim shells#221
thedavidmeister merged 4 commits into
mainfrom
2026-05-23-modernize-rainix

Conversation

@thedavidmeister
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@thedavidmeister thedavidmeister commented May 23, 2026

  • Bumps rainix flake input from rainprotocol/rainix to rainlanguage/rainix and updates flake.lock.
  • package-release.yaml: routes cargo/sol steps through upstream slim shells (sol-shell, rust-shell) for faster cold starts. test-js-bindings keeps the local default shell since it consumes a local nix task.
  • package-release.yaml: cargo publish runs before npm publish so a broken npm token cannot block crates.io. Also fixes the npm secret name (NPM_PUBLISH_PRIVATE_TOKEN — matches the configured org secret). Supersedes the targeted secret-name fix in ci: fix npm token secret name #220.

@thedavidmeister @claude
ci: modernize on latest rainix + slim shells
d3215f5 
- flake.nix: input is now rainlanguage/rainix (was rainprotocol/rainix).
- flake.lock bumped.
- package-release.yaml: switch the cargo/sol calls to upstream slim
  shells (sol-shell for forge soldeer install, rust-shell for cargo
  test/package/release/publish) for faster cold starts. test-js-bindings
  stays on the local default shell because it consumes the local nix task.
- package-release.yaml: cargo publish runs before npm publish so npm
  problems do not block crates.io. NPM secret name fixed
  (NPM_PUBLISH_PRIVATE_TOKEN, matches the configured org secret).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@thedavidmeister thedavidmeister self-assigned this May 23, 2026
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

coderabbitai Bot commented May 23, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Warning

Review limit reached

@thedavidmeister, we couldn't start this review because you've used your available PR reviews for now.

Your plan currently allows 1 review/hour. Refill in 12 minutes and 28 seconds.

Your organization has run out of usage credits. Purchase more in the billing tab.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After more review capacity refills, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

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 trial, open-source, and free plans. In all cases, review capacity refills continuously over time.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 86947122-bacc-46d7-8fa4-df5bd585de9a

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between ff96f34 and 6b0ebc9.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
  • flake.lock is excluded by !**/*.lock
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • .github/workflows/package-release.yaml
  • flake.nix
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch 2026-05-23-modernize-rainix

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.

@thedavidmeister thedavidmeister mentioned this pull request May 23, 2026
Closed
thedavidmeister and others added 3 commits May 23, 2026 07:56
@thedavidmeister
ci: retrigger
7e6843d
@thedavidmeister @claude
ci: inline test-js-bindings to use rust-shell
0ea0e56 
The test-js-bindings nix task body is just npm install/build/test;
running those directly under rust-shell (which already has rust +
foundry + wasm-bindgen-cli) plus actions/setup-node for node lets us
drop the local default shell entirely from package-release.yaml.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@thedavidmeister @claude
Revert "ci: inline test-js-bindings to use rust-shell"
6b0ebc9 
Mixing actions/setup-node with nix shells creates PATH ambiguity and
version drift risk; keep the local default shell for test-js-bindings
where the nix toolchain is fully in charge. A cleaner pass that drops
setup-node entirely (and wraps all npm calls in nix develop -c) is a
follow-up.

This reverts commit 0ea0e567a4a05906f4cb1de7c1eb1024757c2f6e.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@thedavidmeister thedavidmeister merged commit a3f00bb into main May 23, 2026
10 checks passed
@thedavidmeister thedavidmeister deleted the 2026-05-23-modernize-rainix branch May 23, 2026 08:12
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown

github-actions Bot commented May 23, 2026

@coderabbitai assess this PR size classification for the totality of the PR with the following criterias and report it in your comment:

S/M/L PR Classification Guidelines:

This guide helps classify merged pull requests by effort and complexity rather than just line count. The goal is to assess the difficulty and scope of changes after they have been completed.

Small (S)

Characteristics:

  • Simple bug fixes, typos, or minor refactoring
  • Single-purpose changes affecting 1-2 files
  • Documentation updates
  • Configuration tweaks
  • Changes that require minimal context to review

Review Effort: Would have taken 5-10 minutes

Examples:

  • Fix typo in variable name
  • Update README with new instructions
  • Adjust configuration values
  • Simple one-line bug fixes
  • Import statement cleanup

Medium (M)

Characteristics:

  • Feature additions or enhancements
  • Refactoring that touches multiple files but maintains existing behavior
  • Breaking changes with backward compatibility
  • Changes requiring some domain knowledge to review

Review Effort: Would have taken 15-30 minutes

Examples:

  • Add new feature or component
  • Refactor common utility functions
  • Update dependencies with minor breaking changes
  • Add new component with tests
  • Performance optimizations
  • More complex bug fixes

Large (L)

Characteristics:

  • Major feature implementations
  • Breaking changes or API redesigns
  • Complex refactoring across multiple modules
  • New architectural patterns or significant design changes
  • Changes requiring deep context and multiple review rounds

Review Effort: Would have taken 45+ minutes

Examples:

  • Complete new feature with frontend/backend changes
  • Protocol upgrades or breaking changes
  • Major architectural refactoring
  • Framework or technology upgrades

Additional Factors to Consider

When deciding between sizes, also consider:

  • Test coverage impact: More comprehensive test changes lean toward larger classification
  • Risk level: Changes to critical systems bump up a size category
  • Team familiarity: Novel patterns or technologies increase complexity

Notes:

  • the assessment must be for the totality of the PR, that means comparing the base branch to the last commit of the PR
  • the assessment output must be exactly one of: S, M or L (single-line comment) in format of: SIZE={S/M/L}
  • do not include any additional text, only the size classification
  • your assessment comment must not include tips or additional sections
  • do NOT tag me or anyone else on your comment

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

@thedavidmeister thedavidmeister

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant

@thedavidmeister