Skip to content

fix: make docs deploy smoke taxonomy-stable - #135

Merged
kl3inIT merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/docs-taxonomy-deploy-smoke
Jul 29, 2026
Merged

fix: make docs deploy smoke taxonomy-stable#135
kl3inIT merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/docs-taxonomy-deploy-smoke

Conversation

@kl3inIT

@kl3inIT kl3inIT commented Jul 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

  • remove retired taxonomy paths from stable docs smoke checks
  • verify the candidate manifest only against the candidate image
  • keep rollback verification stable when the previous image has an older sitemap
  • record the failed canary and safe restoration from deploy run 30464858925

Root cause

PR #134 changed the docs taxonomy. The candidate container became healthy, but smoke-docs.sh still required /docs/overview. During rollback, deploy-docs.sh also compared the restored old image with the candidate manifest, obscuring the original candidate failure with an expected sitemap mismatch.

Verification

  • forced publication-verifier failure proves rollback restores the previous image
  • stable smoke runs twice, while the candidate manifest verifier runs exactly once
  • docker run ... python:3.13-bookworm bash infrastructure/deployment/scripts/test-deploy-docs-rollback.sh
  • ShellCheck 0.11.0 on all three changed scripts
  • git diff --check

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jul 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Review limit reached

@kl3inIT, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 33 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

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

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: ca8a384c-04a9-4683-946d-10a71daf2e92

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between e2a3763 and 6e05b31.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
  • docs/increments/active/2026-07-29-public-docs-coauthoring/plan.md is excluded by !docs/**
  • docs/increments/active/2026-07-29-public-docs-coauthoring/verification.md is excluded by !docs/**
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • infrastructure/deployment/scripts/deploy-docs.sh
  • infrastructure/deployment/scripts/smoke-docs.sh
  • infrastructure/deployment/scripts/test-deploy-docs-rollback.sh

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.

@kl3inIT
kl3inIT marked this pull request as ready for review July 29, 2026 15:23
@kl3inIT
kl3inIT merged commit bd51aba into main Jul 29, 2026
13 of 14 checks passed
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.

1 participant