Fix weekly update 46: change author to Nathan Flurry and update dependencies

[NicholasKissel]

No description provided.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
rivet-site	Ready	Preview	Comment	Nov 20, 2025 6:58am

3 Skipped Deployments

Project	Deployment	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
rivet-cloud	Ignored			Nov 20, 2025 6:58am
rivet-inspector	Ignored	Preview		Nov 20, 2025 6:58am
rivetkit-serverless	Skipped			Nov 20, 2025 6:58am

[NicholasKissel]

• Fix weekly update 46: change author to Nathan Flurry and update dependencies #3493 👈 (View in Graphite)
• main

---

How to use the Graphite Merge Queue

Add the label merge-queue to this PR to add it to the merge queue.

You must have a Graphite account in order to use the merge queue. Sign up using this link.

An organization admin has enabled the Graphite Merge Queue in this repository.

Please do not merge from GitHub as this will restart CI on PRs being processed by the merge queue.

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

[claude]

PR Review

Thanks for submitting this PR! Here's my review:

Summary

This PR makes two small content fixes:

1. Changes the author of the weekly update (2025-11-09) from "nicholas-kissel" to "nathan-flurry"
2. Fixes a typo in the WebSocket blog post: faGitHub → faGithub
3. Updates dependencies (pnpm-lock.yaml changes)

Code Quality & Best Practices ✅

Positive findings:

• The changes are minimal and focused
• The icon name fix (faGitHub → faGithub) correctly matches the import statement in line 2 of the blog post: import { faGithub, ... } from "@rivet-gg/icons"
• Author change is straightforward and clear

Potential Issues 🔍

Minor observations:

1. Massive dependency updates: The pnpm-lock.yaml shows ~1,616 additions and ~2,301 deletions. While dependency updates are generally good, this PR title mentions "update dependencies" but doesn't specify:

   • Which dependencies were intentionally updated
   • Why they were updated (security, features, bug fixes?)
   • Whether these updates have been tested

   Recommendation: Consider adding a brief description in the PR body explaining what dependencies were updated and why, especially for such a large lockfile change.

2. New dependency in engine package: There's a new dependency added to the engine package:

   engine:
     dependencies:
       '@vbare/compiler':
         specifier: ^0.0.3
         version: 0.0.3(@bare-ts/lib@0.4.0)

   This appears unrelated to the stated PR goals (author change and typo fix). Was this intentional?

Security Concerns 🔒

• The dependency updates include numerous transitive dependency changes
• No obvious security issues, but recommend:
  • Running pnpm audit to check for vulnerabilities
  • Verifying that the dependency updates don't introduce breaking changes
  • Testing the website build and functionality

Test Coverage 🧪

Recommendations:

• Verify the website builds successfully: cd website && pnpm build
• Check that the author attribution displays correctly on the weekly update page
• Verify the GitHub icon renders correctly in the blog post

Performance Considerations ⚡

• Content changes have no performance impact
• Dependency updates may have performance implications (positive or negative) - recommend performance testing if this hasn't been done

Overall Assessment

The content fixes are good and necessary. However, the large dependency update portion of this PR would benefit from:

1. Explanation of what was updated and why
2. Verification that tests pass
3. Confirmation that the website builds and runs correctly

Consider separating content fixes from dependency updates in future PRs for easier review and debugging if issues arise.

Suggested next steps:

• Add PR description explaining the dependency updates
• Verify website builds successfully
• Consider whether the @vbare/compiler addition to the engine package was intentional

[pkg-pr-new]

More templates

• example-ai-agent
• example-background-jobs
• example-better-auth-external-db
• example-bots
• chat-room
• example-cloudflare-workers
• example-cloudflare-workers-hono
• example-counter
• example-counter-serverless
• example-crdt
• example-cursors
• example-cursors-raw-websocket
• example-database
• example-deno
• example-sqlite
• example-elysia
• example-express
• example-freestyle
• example-game
• example-hono
• example-hono-bun
• example-hono-react
• example-kitchen-sink
• example-next-js
• example-rate
• example-raw-fetch-handler
• example-raw-websocket-handler
• example-raw-websocket-handler-proxy
• example-react
• starter
• example-stream
• example-sync
• example-tenant
• example-trpc
• example-workflows

@rivetkit/cloudflare-workers

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/cloudflare-workers@3493

@rivetkit/db

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/db@3493

@rivetkit/framework-base

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/framework-base@3493

@rivetkit/next-js

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/next-js@3493

@rivetkit/react

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/react@3493

rivetkit

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/rivetkit@3493

@rivetkit/sql-loader

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/sql-loader@3493

@rivetkit/engine-runner

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/engine-runner@3493

@rivetkit/engine-runner-protocol

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/engine-runner-protocol@3493

commit: 8a2ca28

[claude]

PR Review: Fix weekly update 46 author and update dependencies

Summary

This PR makes two main changes:

1. Updates the author attribution for the 2025-11-09 weekly update from Nicholas Kissel to Nathan Flurry
2. Updates pnpm dependencies across the monorepo

Code Quality ✅

Positive:

• The author change is clean and follows the existing pattern used in other blog posts
• The dependency updates appear to be minor version bumps and patch releases
• No breaking changes detected in the dependency updates

Potential Issues 🟡

Minor concerns:

1. Title mismatch: The PR title mentions "weekly update 46" but the actual file being changed is dated 2025-11-09. Consider verifying this is indeed week 46.

2. Mixed concerns: The PR combines two unrelated changes:

   • Content fix (author attribution)
   • Dependency updates

   Generally, it's better practice to separate content changes from dependency updates into separate PRs for cleaner git history and easier rollbacks if needed.

3. Missing context: The PR has an empty body. It would be helpful to include:

   • Why the author was changed (was it initially attributed incorrectly?)
   • What prompted the dependency update
   • Whether the dependency updates were tested locally

4. Large lockfile changes: The pnpm-lock.yaml has 3,790 additions and 2,273 deletions. While lockfile updates are expected, this scale suggests:

   • Multiple transitive dependency updates
   • It would be good to verify no unexpected major version bumps occurred
   • Consider running pnpm audit to check for security issues

Performance ✅

No performance concerns - these are documentation and dependency updates only.

Security 🔍

Recommendation: Run pnpm audit to ensure no security vulnerabilities were introduced with the dependency updates.

Test Coverage ⚠️

Missing:

• No indication that the website builds successfully after dependency updates
• Consider running pnpm build in the website package to verify everything compiles

Suggestions

1. Verify the build: Run cd website && pnpm build to ensure the dependency updates don't break the build
2. Add PR description: Explain why the author was changed and what prompted the dependency update
3. Consider splitting: Future PRs might benefit from separating content fixes from dependency updates

Verdict

The changes themselves are fine, but the PR could benefit from:

• Better documentation (non-empty PR body)
• Verification that builds succeed
• Potentially splitting into two focused PRs

Would you like me to verify the build succeeds with these dependency changes?

[claude]

PR Review

Summary

This PR makes several changes:

1. Updates the author of the weekly update blog post from an incorrect value to "nathan-flurry"
2. Updates the author of the WebSocket blog post to "nathan-flurry"
3. Downgrades Next.js and @next/mdx from 16.x to 15.5.6 for MDX compatibility
4. Adds a new dependency @vbare/compiler to the engine package
5. Updates the pnpm lockfile with various transitive dependency version bumps

Code Quality & Best Practices

✅ Good:

• The author corrections in the MDX files are straightforward fixes
• The Next.js downgrade addresses a real compatibility issue with MDX

⚠️ Concerns:

1. Missing context on the @vbare/compiler dependency: The PR adds @vbare/compiler as a new dependency to the engine/package.json, but there's no explanation in the PR description or commit messages about why this is needed. This appears unrelated to the stated purpose of the PR (fixing weekly update author and dependency updates).

2. Commit message quality: The commit messages could be more descriptive:

   • "Fix weekly update 46: change author to Nathan Flurry and update depen…" (truncated)
   • Multiple commits with identical messages ("Update lockfile for @vbare/compiler dependency and Next.js 15.5.6")

   Following the CLAUDE.md guidance, these should use conventional commit format with proper scope, e.g.:

   • fix(website): correct author attribution in blog posts
   • chore(website): downgrade Next.js to 15.5.6 for MDX compatibility
   • feat(engine): add @vbare/compiler dependency

3. Scope creep: This PR appears to combine multiple unrelated changes:

   • Author corrections (bug fix)
   • Next.js downgrade (compatibility fix)
   • New engine dependency (feature addition?)

   Consider splitting unrelated changes into separate PRs for easier review and clearer git history.

Potential Issues

1. Next.js downgrade implications: Downgrading from Next.js 16.x to 15.5.6 is a significant version rollback. Questions to consider:

   • Are there any features from Next.js 16 being used that would break?
   • What specific MDX compatibility issue does this resolve?
   • Is there a plan to upgrade back to Next.js 16 when the MDX issue is resolved?

2. Missing @vbare/compiler usage: The @vbare/compiler package is added but I don't see any code changes that import or use it. Is this dependency actually being used, or is this preparatory work for a future change?

Testing

❓ Questions:

• Have you tested that the website builds successfully with the Next.js downgrade?
• Have you verified that all MDX content renders correctly?
• What functionality requires the @vbare/compiler package?

Security

✅ No obvious security concerns identified. The dependency updates appear to be patch/minor version bumps.

Recommendations

1. Split the PR: Consider separating the author corrections from the dependency changes
2. Add context: Update the PR description to explain:
   • Why @vbare/compiler is needed
   • What specific MDX compatibility issue the Next.js downgrade addresses
   • Whether there's a plan to upgrade Next.js again
3. Improve commit messages: Use conventional commit format as specified in CLAUDE.md
4. Squash duplicate commits: The two identical "Update lockfile" commits should likely be squashed

Minor Notes

• The author changes look correct (fixing typos/incorrect attribution)
• The lockfile updates appear to be automatic transitive dependency updates, which is expected

[claude]

PR Review

Thank you for the contribution! I've reviewed the changes and have the following feedback:

✅ Positive Points

1. Correct Author Attribution: Good catch changing the author from nicholas-kissel to nathan-flurry for the weekly update (website/src/posts/2025-11-09-weekly-updates/page.mdx:1)
2. Icon Import Fixes: Fixed FontAwesome icon imports from faGitHub → faGithub and faNextJs → faNextjs to match the new v7 naming conventions
3. CSS Cleanup: Removed the @config directive from main.css which is no longer needed with Tailwind 3.x

⚠️ Issues & Concerns

1. Dependency Downgrade Strategy

The PR downgrades several major dependencies without clear justification:

• Tailwind CSS: 4.x → 3.x
• Next.js: Appears to have been changed between commits (15.x range)
• FontAwesome: 6.x → 7.x (this is actually an upgrade)

Concerns:

• The commit messages mention "downgrade for compatibility" but don't specify what compatibility issues were encountered
• Mixed upgrades and downgrades in the same PR make it harder to track what's addressing what issue
• No changes to code that might have been incompatible with newer versions

Recommendation: Split this into separate PRs:

1. Author fix + icon naming fixes (low risk)
2. Dependency updates (with clear testing and rationale)

2. Missing Test Evidence

For a PR that makes dependency changes affecting the build system:

• No indication that the build was tested locally
• No screenshots or logs showing the site works after changes
• The PR description is empty - should explain what was broken and how this fixes it

3. Lock File Size

The pnpm-lock.yaml shows 3,869 additions and 2,298 deletions. While lock file changes are expected with dependency updates, this scale suggests:

• Multiple dependency versions changed
• Potentially a pnpm install run that updated more than intended
• Consider if all these changes are necessary or if some should be in a separate "update dependencies" PR

4. Commit History

The PR has 5 commits with some duplication:

• Two commits with identical messages: "Update lockfile for @vbare/compiler dependency and Next.js 15.5.6"
• Consider squashing into logical commits before merge

🔍 Security & Quality

• ✅ No obvious security issues
• ✅ No code quality issues (minimal code changes)
• ⚠️ Large dependency changes increase surface area for issues

📝 Recommendations

1. Add PR Description: Explain what was broken and why these specific version changes fix it
2. Test Evidence: Add a comment showing:
   • pnpm build succeeds
   • pnpm dev works
   • The specific compatibility issue is resolved
3. Consider Splitting: Separate the author fix from dependency changes
4. Documentation: If there are version constraints (e.g., "must use Tailwind 3.x because..."), document them in package.json comments or a docs file

Summary

The author attribution fix and icon naming updates are good changes. However, the dependency modifications need more context and testing evidence before merging. Please add details about what compatibility issues these downgrades/upgrades resolve.

---

Review generated by Claude Code

[claude]

PR Review

Thank you for this pull request! Here's my review:

Summary

This PR makes two main changes:

1. Fix author attribution: Changes the author of the 2025-11-09 weekly update from "nicholas-kissel" to "nathan-flurry"
2. Fix icon imports: Corrects the FontAwesome icon import from faGitHub to faGithub (correct casing) in the WebSocket blog post
3. Update dependencies: Updates pnpm lockfile with various minor dependency version bumps

Code Quality ✅

Positive observations:

• The changes are focused and fix legitimate issues
• Icon naming is now consistent with FontAwesome's actual export (faGithub is the correct casing)
• No breaking changes introduced

Potential Issues 🔍

Minor considerations:

1. Missing CSS change context: The PR removes one line from website/src/styles/main.css according to the diff stats, but this wasn't visible in the diff output. Can you confirm what CSS line was removed and why? If it was just whitespace cleanup, that's fine.

2. Dependency updates: The pnpm-lock.yaml shows significant changes (3869 additions, 2298 deletions). While dependency updates are generally good, a few observations:

   • Most changes appear to be transitive dependency version bumps (tsx, terser, vite, vitest, etc.)
   • There's a new dependency added to the engine workspace: @vbare/compiler - was this intentional or should it be in a separate PR?
   • Consider running pnpm audit to ensure no security vulnerabilities were introduced

Testing Recommendations 🧪

1. Visual verification: Please verify that:

   • The GitHub icon renders correctly on the WebSocket blog post at /blog/2025-10-20-how-we-built-websocket-servers-for-vercel-functions/
   • The author attribution displays correctly on the weekly update at /blog/2025-11-09-weekly-updates/

2. Build verification: Ensure pnpm build succeeds without errors after these dependency updates

Security Concerns 🔒

No security issues identified. The changes are minimal and to documentation/blog content only.

Best Practices 💡

Suggestions for future PRs:

1. Consider separating dependency updates into a separate PR from content fixes for easier review
2. Include a brief note in the PR description about what triggered the dependency updates (e.g., "ran pnpm update")

Verdict

Approved with minor questions ✅

The core changes (author fix and icon casing) are straightforward and correct. Just address the CSS change question and verify the @vbare/compiler addition was intentional, and this is good to merge.

---

Review generated by Claude Code

[claude]

Pull Request Review

Summary

This PR makes two small but important corrections:

1. Changes the author of the 2025-11-09 weekly update from "nicholas-kissel" to "nathan-flurry"
2. Fixes incorrect icon import name from faGitHub to faGithub in the WebSocket blog post
3. Removes unnecessary @config directive from main.css
4. Updates dependencies (pnpm lockfile)

Code Quality: ✅ LGTM

Positive findings:

• All changes are straightforward corrections with no logic changes
• The icon import fix corrects a typo that would have caused a runtime error (importing non-existent faGitHub instead of faGithub)
• The CSS change removes an unnecessary Tailwind config directive, which is a good cleanup
• Author attribution fix ensures proper credit

Potential Issues: ⚠️ Minor observation

Inconsistent author attribution across posts:
While this PR correctly fixes the author for the 2025-11-09 weekly update, I noticed there are 18 other posts in the codebase still attributed to "nicholas-kissel". This isn't necessarily a problem if those posts were legitimately authored by Nicholas Kissel, but worth noting for consistency:

website/src/posts/2025-11-02-weekly-updates/page.mdx
website/src/posts/2025-10-24-weekly-updates/page.mdx
website/src/posts/2025-10-20-weekly-updates/page.mdx
... (and 15 more)

If these should also be attributed to Nathan Flurry, they could be addressed in a follow-up PR. Otherwise, this can be ignored.

Dependency Updates: ✅ Looks safe

The pnpm-lock.yaml shows routine minor version updates:

• Various patch version bumps for dev dependencies (tsx, terser, vitest, etc.)
• No breaking changes or major version updates
• All updates appear to be transitive dependency updates from the package.json changes

Test Coverage: N/A

No tests needed for these changes - they're content and configuration corrections.

Security: ✅ No concerns

No security-sensitive changes.

Performance: ✅ No impact

No performance implications.

Best Practices: ✅ Follows conventions

• Changes align with the repository's structure and conventions
• Commit message follows conventional commits format

---

Recommendation: ✅ APPROVE

This PR is ready to merge. All changes are correct, safe, and improve the codebase by fixing bugs and cleaning up unnecessary configuration.

[claude]

Code Review

This PR makes several minor corrections and updates dependencies. Here's my review:

Summary

• Changes author attribution for weekly update Add issue & PR templates #46 from Nicholas Kissel to Nathan Flurry
• Updates FontAwesome icon imports to use correct v7 casing
• Removes unused Tailwind config directive from main.css
• Updates various npm dependencies (primarily lockfile changes)

---

✅ Positive Observations

1. Icon Import Fixes: The corrections to FontAwesome icon names (faGitHub → faGithub, faNextJs → faNextjs) align with FontAwesome v7 naming conventions. This is necessary after the major version upgrade.

2. CSS Cleanup: Removing the @config directive from main.css is appropriate - this directive is typically unnecessary when Tailwind is properly configured via tailwind.config.ts.

3. Dependency Updates: The PR updates dependencies to their latest versions, which generally improves security and stability.

---

🔍 Observations & Questions

1. Author Attribution Change:

   • The author change from nicholas-kissel to nathan-flurry appears intentional based on the PR title
   • Question: Can you confirm this is the correct author for this weekly update?

2. FontAwesome Major Version Upgrade (^6.7.2 → ^7.1.0):

   • This is a major version change that could introduce breaking changes
   • The icon name fixes in the MDX file suggest you've already addressed the naming changes
   • Recommendation: Verify that FontAwesome v7 doesn't introduce other breaking changes across the site. Consider:
     • Testing all pages that use FontAwesome icons
     • Checking if any other files use the old faGitHub/faNextJs casing

3. Dependency Version Jumps:

   • Several packages have significant version bumps (e.g., @inquirer/prompts from ^6.0.1 to ^8.0.1)
   • Most updates look routine, but major version changes warrant testing

4. Mysterious engine Entry:

   • The lockfile shows a new engine workspace entry with @vbare/compiler dependency
   • This doesn't appear in the package.json changes shown
   • Question: Is this an unrelated change that got included, or is this intentional?

---

🧪 Testing Recommendations

1. Visual Testing: Verify all FontAwesome icons render correctly across the site
2. Build Test: Ensure pnpm build succeeds without warnings
3. MDX Rendering: Check that both modified blog posts render correctly
4. Icon Inventory: Search for any other instances of old icon names:

   grep -r "faGitHub\|faNextJs" website/src/

---

📝 Minor Suggestions

1. Commit Message: Following the CLAUDE.md convention, consider a more descriptive commit message format:

   fix(website): correct author attribution and update dependencies
   
   - Change weekly update #46 author to Nathan Flurry
   - Fix FontAwesome v7 icon import names
   - Remove unused Tailwind config directive
   - Update dependencies to latest versions
   

2. PR Description: The PR body is empty - consider adding a brief description of why these changes were made for future reference.

---

✅ Security & Best Practices

• ✅ No security concerns identified
• ✅ No hardcoded secrets or sensitive data
• ✅ Follows existing code patterns
• ✅ No performance concerns

---

🎯 Overall Assessment

This is a clean, straightforward maintenance PR. The changes are minimal and focused. The primary risk is ensuring the FontAwesome v7 upgrade doesn't break icons elsewhere in the site.

Recommendation: ✅ Approve with testing - Run the suggested tests above before merging.

[graphite-app]

Merge activity

• Nov 20, 7:01 AM UTC: NicholasKissel added this pull request to the Graphite merge queue.
• Nov 20, 7:02 AM UTC: CI is running for this pull request on a draft pull request (#3495) due to your merge queue CI optimization settings.
• Nov 20, 7:03 AM UTC: Merged by the Graphite merge queue via draft PR: #3495.