chore(repo): register the loki and clickhouse PR scopes - #482
Conversation
`semantic-pull-request.yml` validates a PR title against the scope list as it exists on the base branch, so a PR that introduces a new subsystem cannot register its own scope — the check reads main's copy and rejects the title. #480 and #481 both fail on exactly that. Registering the two scopes ahead of the adapters unblocks them. Worth noting in `.agents/skills/create-adapter/SKILL.md`, which currently tells you to add the scope "in the same PR".
|
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
|
Thank you for following the naming conventions! 🙏 |
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe pull request template and semantic title validator now support ChangesPull request scope support
Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
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. Comment |
commit: |
Why
Validate PR titlereads the scope list from the base branch's workflow file, so a PR that introduces a new subsystem cannot register its own scope — the check runs againstmain's copy and rejects the title before the PR can merge.Both adapter PRs fail on exactly this:
What
Registers
clickhouseandlokiin both lists, alphabetically:.github/workflows/semantic-pull-request.yml.github/pull_request_template.mdMerging this unblocks #480 (Loki) and #481 (ClickHouse), whose own copies of these hunks are removed in a follow-up push so they don't conflict.
Follow-up
.agents/skills/create-adapter/SKILL.mdstep 7 currently says to add the scope "in the same PR". That is unworkable for the title check. Worth amending to "in a preceding PR, or omit the scope from the title" — happy to do that separately.Summary by CodeRabbit