fix: failing archive test due to data type mismatch

[gitcommitshow]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes

  • Updated the archiving functionality to correctly return results, enhancing the reliability of data processing.

• Tests

  • Improved test assertions to validate the new array return type for the archiving process.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The archive function in the github object has been updated to return the result of the archiveContributorsLeaderboard function. This change affects the control flow by allowing the function to pass its result back to the caller. Additionally, the test suite has been updated to reflect that the archive function now returns an array, with new assertions added to verify the properties of this array.

Changes

File	Change Summary
index.js	Updated archive function to return result
test/index.test.js	Updated tests for archive function to expect an array return type and added array property assertions

🐇✨
To the code we hop and leap,
A return now sown, for us to reap.
Arrays align in tests so deep,
A rabbit's work, no time to sleep. 🌙
🐇✨

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 X ?

---

Tips

Chat with CodeRabbit Bot (@coderabbitai)

• If you reply to a review comment from CodeRabbit, the bot will automatically respond.
• To engage with CodeRabbit bot directly around the specific lines of code in the PR, mention @coderabbitai in your review comment
• Note: Review comments are made on code diffs or files, not on the PR overview.
• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Note: For conversation with the bot, please use the review comments on code diffs or files.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• The JSON schema for the configuration file is available here.
• 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/coderabbit-overrides.v2.json

[coderabbitai]

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 1

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 713ef19 and 363d1f1.

Files selected for processing (2)

• index.js (1 hunks)
• test/index.test.js (1 hunks)

Additional comments: 3

index.js (2)

• 11-13: The change to the archive function now correctly returns the result from contributorsLib.archiveContributorsLeaderboard, which aligns with the PR objective to fix the data type mismatch issue.

• 11-13: Please verify that all usages of the archive function across the codebase have been updated to handle the new return type.

---

Please ensure that all usages of the archive function, particularly in cli.js, are updated to handle the new return type. Additionally, verify if the README.md requires updates to reflect these changes.

test/index.test.js (1)

• 12-18: The updated test case correctly checks for the new array return type of the archive function and validates the array's properties. This aligns with the changes made to the archive function as described in the PR objective and the AI-generated summary.

[coderabbitai]

The timeout set for the test case is quite long. If this is not necessary for the operation being tested, consider reducing it to speed up the test suite.