Skip to content

Conversation

@tarrencev
Copy link
Contributor

@tarrencev tarrencev commented Sep 10, 2025

Automated changes by create-pull-request GitHub action

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores

    • Updated development and CI container images to v1.7.0-alpha.3 for consistent, up-to-date tooling across development, benchmarking, testing, release, and version validation workflows.
    • Aligns all workflows on the same runtime environment to improve reliability and reduce drift.
  • Bug Fixes

    • None
  • New Features

    • None
  • Notes

    • No user-facing or API changes.

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 10, 2025

ohayo, sensei!

Walkthrough

Container image references were bumped from ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:v1.7.0-alpha.2 to v1.7.0-alpha.3 in the devcontainer and multiple GitHub Actions workflows. No other configuration, steps, or logic changed.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Devcontainer
\.devcontainer/devcontainer.json
Update image tag to ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:v1.7.0-alpha.3.
GitHub Workflows
.github/workflows/bench.yml, .github/workflows/release-dispatch.yml, .github/workflows/test.yml, .github/workflows/validate-versions-existence.yml
Bump workflow container image to ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:v1.7.0-alpha.3 across listed jobs; no other workflow edits.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

Pre-merge checks (3 passed)

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Title Check ✅ Passed The title succinctly captures the primary change, which is bumping the devcontainer-related image tag to v1.7.0-alpha.3, and it aligns with the modifications across container and workflow files without extraneous detail.
Description Check ✅ Passed The description correctly indicates that the pull request was generated by the create-pull-request action, which directly relates to how the changes were introduced and thus is on-topic.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changes. Docstring coverage check skipped.

Tip

👮 Agentic pre-merge checks are now available in preview!

Pro plan users can now enable pre-merge checks in their settings to enforce checklists before merging PRs.

  • Built-in checks – Quickly apply ready-made checks to enforce title conventions, require pull request descriptions that follow templates, validate linked issues for compliance, and more.
  • Custom agentic checks – Define your own rules using CodeRabbit’s advanced agentic capabilities to enforce organization-specific policies and workflows. For example, you can instruct CodeRabbit’s agent to verify that API documentation is updated whenever API schema files are modified in a PR. Note: Upto 5 custom checks are currently allowed during the preview period. Pricing for this feature will be announced in a few weeks.

Example:

reviews:
  pre_merge_checks:
    custom_checks:
      - name: "Undocumented Breaking Changes"
        mode: "warning"
        instructions: |
          Pass/fail criteria: All breaking changes to public APIs, CLI flags, environment variables, configuration keys, database schemas, or HTTP/GraphQL endpoints must be documented in the "Breaking Change" section of the PR description and in CHANGELOG.md. Exclude purely internal or private changes (e.g., code not exported from package entry points or explicitly marked as internal).

Please share your feedback with us on this Discord post.

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch bump-devcontainer

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
Contributor

@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: 1

🧹 Nitpick comments (4)
.github/workflows/release-dispatch.yml (1)

27-27: ohayo, sensei — propose-release container updated

Looks good. Optionally consider driving the tag from a repo variable to avoid drift across workflows.

Example:

-      image: ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:v1.7.0-alpha.3
+      image: ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:${{ vars.DOJO_DEV_IMAGE_TAG }}
.github/workflows/bench.yml (1)

22-22: ohayo, sensei — bench workflow tag updated

All good. If you centralize the image tag via ${{ vars.DOJO_DEV_IMAGE_TAG }}, this job can follow automatically on future bumps.

-      image: ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:v1.7.0-alpha.3
+      image: ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:${{ vars.DOJO_DEV_IMAGE_TAG }}
.github/workflows/test.yml (2)

35-35: ohayo, sensei — build job image bump LGTM

Consider using a repo variable for the tag to keep all jobs in lockstep.

-      image: ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:v1.7.0-alpha.3
+      image: ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:${{ vars.DOJO_DEV_IMAGE_TAG }}

192-193: ohayo, sensei — docs job image bump LGTM

Change is correct. Small unrelated nit: elsewhere in this file, ensure env key casing is consistent (RUST_VERSION vs rust_version) when you next touch it.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 98231fb and a4427fe.

📒 Files selected for processing (5)
  • .devcontainer/devcontainer.json (1 hunks)
  • .github/workflows/bench.yml (1 hunks)
  • .github/workflows/release-dispatch.yml (1 hunks)
  • .github/workflows/test.yml (5 hunks)
  • .github/workflows/validate-versions-existence.yml (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
.devcontainer/devcontainer.json (1)

5-5: ohayo, sensei — devcontainer tag bump approved
Change is correct; rebuild the Dev Container to pick up v1.7.0-alpha.3.

.github/workflows/test.yml (3)

168-169: ohayo, sensei — clippy job image bump LGTM

No concerns.


182-183: ohayo, sensei — fmt job image bump LGTM

Looks consistent.


60-60: ohayo, sensei — test job image bump approved
Katana v1.7.0-alpha.3 Linux AMD64 asset confirmed (HTTP 200).

runs-on: ubuntu-latest
container:
image: ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:v1.7.0-alpha.2
image: ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:v1.7.0-alpha.3
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Verification agent

🧩 Analysis chain

ohayo, sensei — image bump LGTM

Tag updated consistently to v1.7.0-alpha.3. No functional changes.

Quick check that the tag exists on GHCR:


🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail
IMAGE='ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:v1.7.0-alpha.3'
docker manifest inspect "$IMAGE" >/dev/null && echo "OK: $IMAGE present"

Length of output: 44


🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail
IMAGE="ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev"
TAG="v1.7.0-alpha.3"
REGISTRY_URL="https://ghcr.io/v2/${IMAGE}/manifests/${TAG}"

# Verify manifest exists via HTTP API
curl -sf -H "Accept: application/vnd.oci.image.manifest.v1+json" "${REGISTRY_URL}" \
  && echo "OK: ${IMAGE}:${TAG} manifest present" \
  || { echo "ERROR: ${IMAGE}:${TAG} manifest not found"; exit 1; }

Length of output: 68


Fix missing GHCR image tag
ohayo, sensei — the bumped image tag ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:v1.7.0-alpha.3 (validate-versions-existence.yml:18) failed manifest lookup (not found). Publish that tag or point to an existing one before merging.

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
.github/workflows/validate-versions-existence.yml around line 18: the workflow
references a non-existent GHCR image tag
ghcr.io/dojoengine/dojo-dev:v1.7.0-alpha.3 which fails manifest lookup; either
publish that exact tag to GHCR or update the workflow to reference an existing,
published tag (for example revert to the previous working tag or a released
version), then commit the workflow change and re-run the validation to ensure
the manifest resolves.

@glihm glihm merged commit 8e9127d into main Sep 10, 2025
1 check passed
@glihm glihm deleted the bump-devcontainer branch September 10, 2025 16:14
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