[ci] Enabled changelog bot from openwisp-utils

[pushpitkamboj]

Checklist

• I have read the OpenWISP Contributing Guidelines.
• I have manually tested the changes proposed in this pull request.
• I have written new test cases for new code and/or updated existing tests for changes to existing code.
• I have updated the documentation.

Description of Changes

Added a changelog bot workflow to automatically update changelogs when PRs are approved.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@pushpitkamboj has exceeded the limit for the number of commits that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 55 minutes and 59 seconds before requesting another review.

You’ve run out of usage credits. Purchase more in the billing tab.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, 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 the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 0c7db3b7-704a-424b-9085-e2c05cbd2c25

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 66a9e92 and b1cd99f.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• .github/workflows/bot-changelog-runner.yml
• .github/workflows/bot-changelog-trigger.yml

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch ci/changelog_bot

---

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

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[kilo-code-bot]

Code Review Summary

Status: No Issues Found | Recommendation: Merge

Overview

This PR introduces two GitHub Actions workflows that implement a changelog bot automation: a trigger workflow that runs on PR approval and a runner workflow that processes PRs with specific title prefixes ([feature], [fix], [change]).

Files Reviewed

1. .github/workflows/bot-changelog-trigger.yml (39 lines)

   • Trigger: On PR review submitted
   • Filter: Checks if reviewer is OWNER, MEMBER, or COLLABORATOR with 'approved' state
   • Logic: Parses PR title for [feature|fix|change] prefixes
   • Output: Uploads PR number as an artifact with 1-day retention
   • Permissions: Minimal (empty permissions block)

2. .github/workflows/bot-changelog-runner.yml (54 lines)

   • Trigger: On completion of 'Changelog Bot Trigger' workflow
   • Logic: Downloads artifact and validates PR number before passing to reusable workflow
   • Validation: RegEx check ensures PR number is numeric
   • Permissions: Granular (contents: read, pull-requests: write, issues: write)
   • Dependencies: Calls openwisp/openwisp-utils/.github/workflows/reusable-bot-changelog.yml@master

Security Assessment

Positive practices identified:

• Uses minimal/restrictive permissions (principle of least privilege)
• Validates PR number input before use (prevents injection)
• Artifact retention limited to 1 day (reduces exposure)
• Approval requirement restricted to trusted repository members
• Uses environment variables safely (no direct shell interpolation of user inputs)

Risk considerations (non-blocking):

• The author_association check allows any org MEMBER to trigger this. Consider whether this should be restricted to CODEOWNERS or maintainers for repositories with many members.
• The workflow delegates to an external reusable workflow (openwisp/openwisp-utils). Ensure this repository and workflow are trusted and regularly audited.

Conclusion

The workflows follow GitHub Actions security best practices with appropriate permission scoping, input validation, and clear separation of concerns between trigger and runner workflows. No critical issues identified.

---

_{Reviewed by kimi-k2.5-0127 · 72,613 tokens}