chore(main): release 1.482.0 #5561
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Deploying windmill with
|
| Latest commit: |
686271f
|
| Status: | ✅ Deploy successful! |
| Preview URL: | https://3c4f3e3f.windmill.pages.dev |
| Branch Preview URL: | https://release-please--branches--ma.windmill.pages.dev |
![ellipsis-dev[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/64358?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Reviewed everything up to 0523d07 in 55 seconds
More details
- Looked at
24lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
3drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version updated to 1.482.0; ensure alignment with CHANGELOG. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0; ensure all version references are consistent. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:9
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing and spacing framework names for clarity and consistency. Instead of 'svelte5 + vite6', use 'Svelte 5 and Vite 6' or a similar formatting that matches standard conventions. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 50% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a change made in the diff, specifically the addition of 'svelte5 + vite6' in the changelog. The suggestion to capitalize and space the framework names is a matter of style and consistency, which could be considered a code quality improvement. However, it is not a critical issue that requires a code change.
The comment might be seen as unimportant since it deals with stylistic preferences rather than a functional issue. The changelog is often less formal, and the current format might be acceptable.
While the comment addresses a stylistic issue, maintaining consistency in documentation can be important for readability and professionalism.
The comment addresses a stylistic issue in the changelog, which is related to the changes made in the diff. It is not a critical issue but could be considered a minor improvement for consistency.
Workflow ID: wflow_e4kCkQziVfr1ZgWz
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
fdbd84b to
9ea2435
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 9ea2435 in 1 minute and 0 seconds
More details
- Looked at
29lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
3drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump looks correct; ensure consistency with all version references. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0 looks correct. Ensure consistency with the changelog. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:8
- Draft comment:
There's an inconsistency in how product names are written. In the Features section, the bullet says '* migrate to svelte5 + vite6' while in the Bug Fixes section it says '* Remaining svelte 5 bugs'. Consider using a consistent naming convention (e.g., 'Svelte 5' and 'Vite 6') throughout the changelog for clarity and consistency. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment addresses a stylistic inconsistency in the changelog, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to comment on purely informative or unimportant issues, and this seems to fall into that category. The inconsistency does not affect the functionality or logic of the code.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be crucial for understanding and maintaining the project.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize comments on code changes and logic over stylistic issues in documentation. This comment does not address a code change or logic issue.
The comment should be deleted as it does not pertain to a code change or logic issue, and it addresses a stylistic inconsistency in documentation.
Workflow ID: wflow_4BL8uvDQedtFCKpS
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
a46db0c to
94e1846
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 94e1846 in 1 minute and 8 seconds
More details
- Looked at
29lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
4drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump to 1.482.0 appears correct. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump to 1.482.0 looks correct. Confirm it's synced with any other version/release config if applicable. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:8
- Draft comment:
Typo: Consider changing 'svelte5 + vite6' to 'Svelte 5 + Vite 6' to ensure consistency and clarity. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to make comments on purely informative or unimportant issues. This comment is about capitalization, which is not critical to the functionality or logic of the code.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize comments that address code changes or logic issues. This comment does not address a functional issue.
The comment should be deleted because it addresses a stylistic issue rather than a code change or logic issue.
4. CHANGELOG.md:12
- Draft comment:
Typo: Consider changing 'svelte 5' to 'Svelte 5' (capitalizing 'Svelte') to match common naming conventions. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a change in the diff, specifically a typographical suggestion. However, it is not a code change that affects functionality or logic. The comment is more about style and convention, which is not critical to the code's operation. According to the rules, comments should only be kept if they suggest a necessary code change.
I might be underestimating the importance of maintaining consistent naming conventions in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism.
While naming conventions are important, the rules prioritize comments that suggest necessary code changes. This is more of a stylistic suggestion, which is not critical according to the rules.
The comment should be deleted as it suggests a stylistic change rather than a necessary code change.
Workflow ID: wflow_M9JCPd7bqBCoqKYW
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
2 times, most recently
from
1a5d04a to
3c80c58
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 3c80c58 in 1 minute and 17 seconds
More details
- Looked at
30lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
5drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0; change looks correct. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0. Confirm consistency with changelog. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful =0%<= threshold50%
This comment is asking the PR author to confirm consistency with the changelog, which is similar to asking them to double-check something. This violates the rule against asking for confirmations or double-checks.
3. CHANGELOG.md:8
- Draft comment:
Typo: Consider capitalizing 'ai' to 'AI' in the feature description 'Implement sending diff to ai' for consistency. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to make comments that are obvious or unimportant, and this seems to fall into that category. Additionally, the changelog is not part of the code logic, so this comment might not be necessary.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize actionable code changes over stylistic suggestions in documentation. This comment does not address a code logic issue.
The comment should be deleted as it does not address a code change and is more about stylistic consistency in documentation.
4. CHANGELOG.md:9
- Draft comment:
Typo: In 'migrate to svelte5 + vite6', consider formatting the tool names to 'Svelte 5' and 'Vite 6' for better readability. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a formatting suggestion for tool names in a changelog entry. This is a purely informative comment and does not indicate a necessary code change. The formatting of tool names in a changelog is not critical and does not affect functionality.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistent formatting in documentation. However, the rules specify not to make purely informative comments unless a code change is required.
Even if consistent formatting is generally good practice, it does not warrant a comment unless it affects functionality or causes confusion.
Delete the comment as it is purely informative and does not indicate a necessary code change.
5. CHANGELOG.md:14
- Draft comment:
Typo: In the bug fix description 'Remaining svelte 5 bugs', consider capitalizing 'svelte' to 'Svelte' for consistency. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful =0%<= threshold50%
The comment is purely informative and suggests a change in the PR description, which is against the rules. It does not provide a code suggestion or address a potential issue in the code itself.
Workflow ID: wflow_W9dgRq5ObbJfsUL9
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
24c03d7 to
8919aae
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 8919aae in 1 minute and 12 seconds
More details
- Looked at
31lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
3drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0. Ensure this is in sync with the changelog. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version updated to 1.482.0. Ensure this bump is in sync with other release artifacts. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:10
- Draft comment:
There's an inconsistency in how 'svelte 5' is formatted. In the Features section, it’s written as 'svelte5', while in the Bug Fixes section it's 'svelte 5'. For consistency and clarity, please choose one style and update accordingly. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment addresses a formatting inconsistency in the changelog, which is a minor issue. The changelog is not part of the code logic, and such inconsistencies do not affect the functionality of the code. The comment does not suggest a code change that impacts the software's behavior or quality.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can affect readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the changelog is not part of the code logic, and the inconsistency does not impact the software's functionality. The comment does not suggest a necessary code change.
The comment should be deleted as it addresses a minor formatting issue in the changelog, which does not require a code change.
Workflow ID: wflow_AqPSKyOAibM9UxT8
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
2 times, most recently
from
acb0a68 to
a7179f2
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on acb0a68 in 1 minute and 33 seconds
More details
- Looked at
32lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
7drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version updated to 1.482.0 as per changelog. Ensure consistency with semantics. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump to 1.482.0 looks correct. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:8
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'ai' to 'AI' in the feature description '* Implement sending diff to ai (...)' for clarity. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change that affects functionality or logic. The rules specify not to make comments that are obvious or unimportant, and this seems to fall into that category. The capitalization of 'AI' is a minor stylistic preference and does not impact the code's functionality.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistent terminology in documentation, which can be important for clarity and professionalism.
While consistency in documentation is important, the rules prioritize comments that address functional or logical issues over stylistic ones.
The comment should be deleted as it addresses a minor stylistic issue rather than a functional or logical code change.
4. CHANGELOG.md:9
- Draft comment:
Consider using consistent and clear formatting by capitalizing and adding a space: change 'migrate to svelte5 + vite6' to 'Migrate to Svelte 5 and Vite 6'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to make comments that are obvious or unimportant, and this seems to fall into that category. Additionally, the changelog is not part of the code logic, so it might not be relevant to comment on its formatting.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistent formatting in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism.
While consistent formatting is important, the rules emphasize focusing on code changes and logic, not stylistic or formatting issues in documentation.
The comment should be deleted as it pertains to a stylistic change in documentation, not a code change.
5. CHANGELOG.md:16
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'json' to 'JSON' in the entry '* frontend: app builder - force json configuration in rich result (...)'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code logic issue. The capitalization of 'json' to 'JSON' is a minor stylistic suggestion and does not indicate a code change requirement. According to the rules, comments should not be made on unimportant or obvious issues, and this seems to fall into that category.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which could be considered a quality issue. However, the rules emphasize actionable and clear code quality refactors, not stylistic changes in documentation.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize actionable code changes over stylistic suggestions in documentation. Therefore, this comment does not meet the criteria for retention.
The comment should be deleted as it pertains to a minor stylistic change in documentation, not a code change requirement.
6. CHANGELOG.md:17
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'ai' to 'AI' in the entry '* prevent invalid returned ai completion object errors (...)'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change that affects functionality or logic. The rules specify not to comment on unimportant or obvious issues, and this seems to fall into that category. The capitalization of 'AI' is not a critical issue that requires a code change.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistent capitalization in documentation, which could be considered a quality issue.
While consistency in documentation is important, the rules prioritize comments on functional or logical issues over stylistic ones.
The comment should be deleted as it pertains to a stylistic change, which is not critical according to the rules.
7. CHANGELOG.md:18
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing and standardizing 'svelte 5' to 'Svelte 5' in the entry '* Remaining svelte 5 bugs (...)' for consistency with other entries. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code logic issue. The rules specify not to comment on unimportant or obvious issues, and this seems to fall into that category. The capitalization of 'svelte 5' does not affect the functionality or logic of the code.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize comments on logic and functionality over stylistic issues. This comment does not address a functional change.
The comment should be deleted as it addresses a stylistic issue rather than a functional or logical change.
Workflow ID: wflow_OcXYOln625Frl69P
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on a7179f2 in 1 minute and 32 seconds
More details
- Looked at
33lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
7drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version number updated to 1.482.0; change looks correct. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump to 1.482.0 looks correct. Ensure that a trailing newline is maintained per project conventions. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:8
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'ai' to 'AI' for consistency and clarity. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to make comments on purely informative or unimportant issues. Capitalization for consistency is a minor stylistic issue and does not require a code change.
The capitalization might improve readability and consistency, which could be considered a minor improvement. However, it does not impact the functionality or logic of the code.
While consistency is generally good, the rules prioritize comments that require code changes, not stylistic suggestions.
The comment should be deleted as it pertains to a stylistic change, not a necessary code change.
4. CHANGELOG.md:9
- Draft comment:
Please capitalize 'azure' to 'Azure' as it is a proper noun. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a logic or code quality issue. The rules specify not to comment on purely stylistic changes unless they are part of a code quality refactor. This change does not affect the functionality or quality of the code.
I might be overlooking the importance of proper nouns in documentation, but the rules emphasize logic and code quality over stylistic changes.
Even though proper nouns are important, the rules prioritize logic and code quality issues over stylistic changes in comments.
The comment should be deleted as it pertains to a stylistic change, not a logic or code quality issue.
5. CHANGELOG.md:10
- Draft comment:
There is an inconsistency in the naming of 'svelte5'. Consider using a consistent format (e.g., 'Svelte 5') to match its usage elsewhere in the changelog. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment addresses a naming inconsistency, which is not a code logic issue. The changelog is meant to document changes, and while consistency is nice, it is not critical to the functionality or logic of the code. The comment does not suggest a code change that affects the software's behavior.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can affect readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the primary focus should be on code logic and functionality. The comment does not address a functional issue, so it is not critical.
The comment should be deleted as it does not address a code logic issue or a change that affects the software's behavior.
6. CHANGELOG.md:15
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'json' to 'JSON' as it is an acronym and should be consistently formatted. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change rather than a functional or logical issue. The changelog is meant to document changes, and while consistency in formatting is good, it doesn't impact the functionality or logic of the code. The comment does not suggest a code change that affects the software's behavior.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism. However, the rules emphasize actionable and clear code quality refactors, not stylistic changes in documentation.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize comments that address functional or logical issues over stylistic ones. This comment does not meet the criteria for a necessary code change.
The comment should be deleted as it addresses a stylistic issue rather than a functional or logical code change.
7. CHANGELOG.md:16
- Draft comment:
Please capitalize 'ai' to 'AI' for consistency and clarity in the description of the bug fix. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a change in the diff, specifically the changelog entry. However, the capitalization of 'ai' to 'AI' is a minor stylistic issue and does not require a code change. It is not a significant issue that affects the functionality or logic of the code.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be crucial for understanding and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the comment does not address a functional or logical issue in the code, and the changelog is not part of the code logic itself.
The comment should be deleted as it addresses a minor stylistic issue that does not require a code change.
Workflow ID: wflow_AwS1CuG1pS4f9niP
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
683dcf5 to
80415d0
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 80415d0 in 1 minute and 32 seconds
More details
- Looked at
33lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
6drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump from 1.481.0 to 1.482.0 is correctly applied. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0. Ensure this version aligns with the changelog and semantic versioning. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:8
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'ai' to 'AI' in the phrase '* Implement sending diff to ai' for consistency. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to make comments that are obvious or unimportant, and this seems to fall into that category. Additionally, it does not suggest a code quality refactor, which is encouraged by the rules.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be considered part of code quality. However, the rules emphasize actionable and clear refactors, not stylistic changes.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize actionable code changes over stylistic suggestions. This comment does not suggest a change that impacts functionality or code quality in a significant way.
The comment should be deleted as it does not suggest a necessary code change and focuses on a minor stylistic issue.
4. CHANGELOG.md:9
- Draft comment:
Consider changing '* make azure a standalone AI provider' to '* Make Azure a standalone AI provider' to ensure proper capitalization for both the beginning of the sentence and the proper noun 'Azure'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change. It does not address a functional or logical issue in the code. The changelog is not part of the code logic, and the capitalization does not affect the functionality.
I might be overlooking the importance of maintaining a consistent style in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism.
While style consistency is important, the rules specify that comments should only be made if there is a code change required. This is a stylistic suggestion, not a code change.
The comment should be deleted because it addresses a stylistic issue rather than a code change, and the rules specify not to comment on such issues.
5. CHANGELOG.md:14
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'json' to 'JSON' in '* frontend: app builder - force json configuration in rich result' for proper terminology. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a minor stylistic change in the changelog, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to make comments on unimportant or obvious issues. Capitalizing 'json' to 'JSON' is a minor stylistic issue and does not require a code change.
I might be underestimating the importance of proper terminology in documentation. However, the rules emphasize focusing on code changes rather than stylistic issues in documentation.
While proper terminology is important, the rules prioritize actionable code changes over stylistic documentation changes.
The comment should be deleted as it focuses on a minor stylistic issue in the changelog, which does not require a code change.
6. CHANGELOG.md:15
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'ai' to 'AI' in '* prevent invalid returned ai completion object errors' for consistency. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to make comments on purely informative or unimportant issues. Capitalization for consistency is a minor stylistic issue and does not require a code change.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize comments that require code changes. This is a minor stylistic issue and does not impact functionality or logic.
The comment should be deleted as it pertains to a minor stylistic issue and does not require a code change.
Workflow ID: wflow_oLPuSaiNME28XyTw
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
c79ff03 to
bacba43
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on bacba43 in 1 minute and 32 seconds
More details
- Looked at
34lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
8drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version number update is correct and aligns with the changelog. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:2
- Draft comment:
Extra blank line may be removed if not required. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0. Ensure this change is aligned with the release process. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
4. CHANGELOG.md:8
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'ai' to 'AI' in '* Implement sending diff to ai ...' for consistency and clarity. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change that affects functionality or logic. The rules specify not to make comments that are obvious or unimportant, and this seems to fall into that category. The capitalization of 'ai' does not impact the functionality of the code.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism. However, the rules emphasize actionable and clear code quality refactors, not stylistic changes.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize functional and logical changes over stylistic ones. The comment does not address a functional issue, so it should be removed.
The comment should be deleted as it addresses a stylistic issue rather than a functional or logical code change.
5. CHANGELOG.md:9
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing the first word and proper nouns in '* make azure a standalone AI provider ...'. For example, change to 'Make Azure a standalone AI provider'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful =0%<= threshold50%
This comment is purely stylistic and does not address any functional or technical aspect of the code. It suggests a change in capitalization, which is not critical to the functionality or understanding of the code. Therefore, it does not align with the rules for useful comments.
6. CHANGELOG.md:10
- Draft comment:
Consider using consistent capitalization for technology names in '* migrate to svelte5 + vite6 ...'. For clarity, you might update it to 'Migrate to Svelte 5 + Vite 6' (adjusting as per project style). - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to make comments that are obvious or unimportant, and this seems to fall into that category. The capitalization of technology names in a changelog is not critical to the functionality or logic of the code.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistent capitalization for documentation purposes, which could be considered a part of code quality.
While documentation consistency is important, the rules emphasize actionable code changes and logic over stylistic documentation changes.
The comment should be deleted as it pertains to a stylistic change in documentation, not a code change.
7. CHANGELOG.md:16
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'ai' to 'AI' in '* prevent invalid returned ai completion object errors ...' for consistency. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to make comments on purely informative or unimportant issues. Capitalization for consistency is a minor stylistic issue and does not require a code change.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize comments that require code changes. This is a minor stylistic issue and does not warrant a comment according to the rules.
Delete the comment as it is about a minor stylistic issue and does not require a code change.
8. CHANGELOG.md:17
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'svelte' to 'Svelte' in '* Remaining svelte 5 bugs ...' for consistency. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change. The capitalization of 'svelte' does not affect the functionality or logic of the code. The comment does not point out a necessary change, as it is purely about consistency in capitalization.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the comment does not point out a functional issue or a necessary code change. It is more of a suggestion for improvement rather than a required change.
The comment should be deleted as it does not point out a necessary code change and is more about stylistic consistency.
Workflow ID: wflow_S7HeeBIpYhPSGDEs
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
8e03782 to
c5a34db
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on c5a34db in 1 minute and 31 seconds
More details
- Looked at
34lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
8drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Confirm that the version bump to 1.482.0 in version.txt is consistently applied throughout the project (e.g., in package metadata files if applicable). - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:33%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bumped to 1.482.0. Ensure it remains in sync with the changelog and any other version references. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:8
- Draft comment:
Typographical: Consider capitalizing 'ai' to 'AI' for consistency with similar entries. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to make comments on purely informative or unimportant issues. Consistency in capitalization is a minor stylistic issue and does not require a code change.
The consistency in capitalization might be important for readability and professionalism, which could justify the comment's presence.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize actionable code changes over stylistic suggestions. This comment does not indicate a code change is required.
The comment should be deleted as it does not pertain to a code change and is purely stylistic.
4. CHANGELOG.md:9
- Draft comment:
Typographical: Consider capitalizing the bullet to 'Make Azure a standalone AI provider' to maintain consistency and proper noun formatting. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a typographical change, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to comment on purely informative or unimportant issues, and this seems to fall into that category. The changelog is not part of the code logic, and the comment does not suggest a code quality refactor.
I might be overlooking the importance of consistency in documentation, but the rules emphasize code changes, not documentation formatting.
The rules are clear about focusing on code changes, and typographical suggestions in documentation do not align with the primary focus of code logic and quality refactors.
The comment should be deleted as it does not pertain to a code change and is about a typographical issue in documentation.
5. CHANGELOG.md:10
- Draft comment:
Typographical: Consider updating '* migrate to svelte5 + vite6' to '* Migrate to Svelte 5 + Vite 6' to improve readability and proper naming conventions. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a typographical change, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to comment on purely informative or unimportant issues. This seems to be a minor readability improvement, not a necessary code change.
I might be underestimating the importance of maintaining consistent naming conventions in documentation, which could be considered part of code quality.
While naming conventions are important, the rules prioritize actionable code changes over minor typographical suggestions. This does not seem to warrant a comment based on the rules provided.
The comment should be deleted as it does not pertain to a necessary code change and is more of a minor typographical suggestion.
6. CHANGELOG.md:15
- Draft comment:
Typographical: Consider capitalizing 'json' to 'JSON' in '* frontend: app builder - force json configuration in rich result'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a typographical suggestion, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to make comments that are obvious or unimportant, and this seems to fall into that category. Additionally, the capitalization of 'json' in a changelog does not affect the functionality of the code.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which could be considered a part of code quality.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize actionable code changes over typographical suggestions in documentation.
The comment should be deleted as it does not pertain to a necessary code change and is more about typographical consistency.
7. CHANGELOG.md:16
- Draft comment:
Typographical: Replace 'ai' with 'AI' in '* prevent invalid returned ai completion object errors' for consistency. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a typographical change, which is not a critical issue. The changelog is meant to document changes, and while consistency is good, this is not a significant problem that requires a code change. The comment does not point out a functional or logical error.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the changelog is not part of the functional code, and this typographical issue does not affect the software's operation.
The comment should be deleted as it does not point out a critical issue that requires a code change.
8. CHANGELOG.md:17
- Draft comment:
Typographical: Consider updating '* Remaining svelte 5 bugs' to '* Remaining Svelte 5 bugs' to correct the capitalization. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment looked like it was already resolved.
Workflow ID: wflow_ksXypLWKy1FMVQc8
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
6af42af to
9e6ac95
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 9e6ac95 in 1 minute and 23 seconds
More details
- Looked at
35lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
7drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version updated to 1.482.0. Ensure the trailing newline (empty line) is intentional. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump to 1.482.0 looks correct. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:8
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'AI' consistently (e.g., change 'ai' to 'AI') if it's intended as the acronym for Artificial Intelligence. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change rather than a functional or logical issue. The changelog is not part of the code logic, and the capitalization of 'AI' does not affect functionality. The comment does not point out a code change requirement, so it might not be necessary to keep it.
The capitalization might be important for consistency and professionalism in documentation, which could be considered a quality issue.
While consistency is important, the comment does not address a functional issue or a code change requirement, which is the primary focus of the review.
The comment should be deleted as it does not address a code change requirement and is more about stylistic consistency.
4. CHANGELOG.md:10
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'Azure' (i.e., change 'azure' to 'Azure') to reflect the proper noun for the Microsoft service. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change. The capitalization of 'Azure' is a minor issue and does not affect the functionality or logic of the code. According to the rules, comments should only be made if there is a clear code change required, and this is not the case here.
The capitalization of proper nouns can be important for clarity and professionalism, especially in documentation. However, the rules specify that comments should not be made for unimportant issues.
While capitalization is important, it does not constitute a code change, and the rules prioritize comments that address code changes over stylistic issues.
The comment should be deleted as it pertains to a stylistic issue rather than a necessary code change.
5. CHANGELOG.md:11
- Draft comment:
Consider formatting framework names and version numbers consistently. For instance, 'svelte5' could be written as 'Svelte 5' and 'vite6' as 'Vite 6', if they refer to the respective versions. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about formatting, which is not a code change. It doesn't suggest a code quality refactor or a necessary change. The changelog is meant to document changes, and the current format does not hinder understanding. The comment is more of a suggestion for consistency rather than a required change.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can improve readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the comment does not point out a critical issue that needs addressing. The current format is understandable, and the comment does not suggest a necessary change.
The comment should be deleted as it does not point out a necessary change in the code or documentation.
6. CHANGELOG.md:16
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'JSON' (i.e., change 'json' to 'JSON') to properly reflect the standard JSON format. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a functional or logical issue. The changelog is meant to document changes, and while stylistic consistency is nice, it doesn't impact the functionality or logic of the code. Therefore, the comment does not indicate a necessary code change.
I might be underestimating the importance of stylistic consistency in documentation. However, the rules emphasize focusing on functional or logical issues rather than stylistic ones.
While stylistic consistency is important, it does not warrant a comment unless it impacts functionality or logic, which is not the case here.
The comment should be deleted as it does not indicate a necessary code change and focuses on a stylistic issue.
7. CHANGELOG.md:18
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'Svelte' (i.e., change 'svelte 5' to 'Svelte 5') to ensure consistent and proper naming of the framework. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change that affects functionality or logic. The rules specify not to make comments that are obvious or unimportant, and this seems to fall into that category. Additionally, the changelog is not part of the code logic itself.
I might be overlooking the importance of maintaining consistent naming conventions in documentation, which could be considered important for clarity and professionalism.
While consistency in naming is important, the rules prioritize comments on code logic and functionality over stylistic or documentation issues.
The comment should be deleted as it pertains to a stylistic change in documentation, which is not a priority according to the rules.
Workflow ID: wflow_jpBWk1rqZ218qGlH
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
f811d7e to
166a060
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 166a060 in 1 minute and 48 seconds
More details
- Looked at
36lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
9drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump update looks correct. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump to 1.482.0 looks correct. Ensure it is in sync with CHANGELOG. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:8
- Draft comment:
Typo: In the bullet '* handle sending selected lines to ai context', consider capitalizing 'ai' to 'AI' for consistency with common usage. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to make comments that are obvious or unimportant, and this seems to fall into that category. Additionally, the changelog is not part of the code logic, so it might not be relevant to comment on it.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize actionable code changes over stylistic suggestions in documentation.
The comment should be deleted as it does not pertain to a code change and is more about stylistic consistency, which is not prioritized by the rules.
4. CHANGELOG.md:9
- Draft comment:
Typo: In the bullet '* Implement sending diff to ai', consider capitalizing 'ai' to 'AI'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a typographical suggestion, which is not a code change. It does not address a functional issue or a code quality refactor. The capitalization of 'AI' is a minor stylistic choice and does not impact the functionality or quality of the code.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistent capitalization in documentation, which can affect readability and professionalism.
While consistency in documentation is important, the rules prioritize comments that address code changes or quality refactors. This comment does not meet those criteria.
The comment should be deleted as it does not address a code change or quality refactor and is not impactful enough to warrant a change.
5. CHANGELOG.md:10
- Draft comment:
Typo: In the bullet '* make azure a standalone AI provider', 'azure' should be capitalized to 'Azure' to reflect the proper noun. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment addresses a typographical issue, which is not critical to the functionality or logic of the code. According to the rules, comments should not be made on unimportant issues. Capitalization of 'azure' is a minor issue and does not affect the code's functionality.
I might be underestimating the importance of proper capitalization in documentation, which can affect professionalism and clarity.
While proper capitalization is important for professionalism, it is not critical to the functionality or logic of the code, and thus does not warrant a comment according to the rules.
The comment should be deleted as it addresses a minor typographical issue that does not affect the functionality or logic of the code.
6. CHANGELOG.md:11
- Draft comment:
Typo: In the bullet '* migrate to svelte5 + vite6', consider formatting as 'migrate to Svelte 5 + Vite 6' for clarity and proper spacing. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment addresses a minor formatting issue in the changelog. While it suggests a clearer format, it does not point out a code change requirement. The changelog is typically for documentation purposes, and the suggested change does not impact functionality or logic.
I might be underestimating the importance of clear documentation. However, the rules specify not to comment on unimportant issues, and this seems to fall into that category.
Even though clear documentation is important, the change suggested is not critical and does not affect the code's functionality.
The comment should be deleted as it does not address a necessary code change and is not critical.
7. CHANGELOG.md:17
- Draft comment:
Typo: In the bullet '* flow editor svelte 5 issues', consider capitalizing 'svelte' to 'Svelte' (i.e., 'flow editor Svelte 5 issues'). - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not crucial to the functionality or logic of the code. The capitalization of 'svelte' does not impact the code's behavior or logic, and such a change is not necessary for the changelog to be understood.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be important for professional presentation.
While consistency is important, the comment does not address a functional issue or a significant error. It is more of a stylistic preference.
The comment should be deleted as it does not address a necessary change in the code or documentation.
8. CHANGELOG.md:18
- Draft comment:
Typo: In the bullet '* frontend: app builder - force json configuration in rich result', 'json' should be capitalized to 'JSON'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic issue in a documentation file, which does not require a code change. The rules specify not to comment on purely informative or unimportant issues, and this seems to fall into that category.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize comments that require code changes, and this is not one of them.
The comment should be deleted as it does not pertain to a code change and is about a minor stylistic issue in documentation.
9. CHANGELOG.md:19
- Draft comment:
Typo: In the bullet '* prevent invalid returned ai completion object errors', consider capitalizing 'ai' to 'AI'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a functional or logical issue. The rules specify not to make comments that are obvious or unimportant, and this seems to fall into that category. The capitalization of 'AI' is not critical to the understanding or functionality of the changelog entry.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistent capitalization in documentation, which can affect readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize comments that address functional or logical issues over stylistic ones. This comment does not address a critical issue.
The comment should be deleted as it addresses a minor stylistic issue that does not require a code change.
Workflow ID: wflow_CLAmlnhQA0EZauVv
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
b0c40b0 to
1d27bc2
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 1d27bc2 in 1 minute and 31 seconds
More details
- Looked at
37lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
5drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version updated to 1.482.0. Consider ensuring the file ends with a newline per best practices. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:33%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump update: Confirmed version updated to 1.482.0. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:9
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'ai' to 'AI' in the bullet '* handle sending selected lines to ai context' for consistency. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change, which is not a code change. The rules specify not to make comments on purely informative or unimportant issues. Capitalization for consistency is a minor stylistic issue and does not require a code change.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can be important for readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize actionable code changes over stylistic suggestions. This comment does not indicate a necessary code change.
The comment should be deleted as it does not pertain to a necessary code change and is more of a stylistic suggestion.
4. CHANGELOG.md:18
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'json' to 'JSON' in the bullet '* frontend: app builder - force json configuration in rich result' for consistency with common standards. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about a stylistic change that is not related to any code logic or functionality. It is also not about a change introduced in this diff, as the changelog entry was not modified in this diff. The comment does not suggest a code change that is required.
I might be overlooking the importance of consistency in documentation, but the rules specify not to comment on unimportant or obvious issues.
While consistency is important, the rules prioritize actionable and necessary comments related to code changes.
The comment should be deleted as it does not pertain to a change made in this diff and is not about a necessary code change.
5. CHANGELOG.md:12
- Draft comment:
There's an inconsistency in formatting for Svelte version formatting: consider using a consistent style (e.g., 'Svelte 5' instead of 'svelte5') as seen in '* migrate to svelte5 + vite6' compared to '* flow editor svelte 5 issues'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment addresses a formatting inconsistency, which is a minor issue and does not require a code change. The changelog is not part of the code logic, and such inconsistencies are not critical. The comment does not suggest a code quality refactor or a necessary change.
I might be underestimating the importance of consistency in documentation, which can affect readability and professionalism.
While consistency is important, the changelog is not part of the code logic, and such minor inconsistencies do not warrant a comment in a code review context.
The comment should be deleted as it addresses a minor formatting issue in the changelog, which does not require a code change.
Workflow ID: wflow_T79q7n1CylARNgmT
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
09b2a05 to
d33b9b2
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on d33b9b2 in 31 seconds
More details
- Looked at
58lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
2drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0. Ensure consistency with changelog. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump correctly updated to 1.482.0. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
Workflow ID: wflow_ptNWW0YXTIkxRWNR
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
1a5ee48 to
f117ba1
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❌ Changes requested. Incremental review on f117ba1 in 1 minute and 20 seconds
More details
- Looked at
58lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
2drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump correctly updated to 1.482.0. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0. Ensure this is consistent with the changelog and release tags. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
Workflow ID: wflow_XgRNG5V1MxMr83Sh
Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
| * Implement sending diff to ai ([#5510](https://github.com/windmill-labs/windmill/issues/5510)) ([e118d2c](https://github.com/windmill-labs/windmill/commit/e118d2cd5f9c641884a76229802a5228ef41f1a5)) | ||
| * make azure a standalone AI provider ([#5558](https://github.com/windmill-labs/windmill/issues/5558)) ([2c5e58c](https://github.com/windmill-labs/windmill/commit/2c5e58cf1ab9225d516540b38d9e4dde482a3a7f)) | ||
| * migrate to svelte5 + vite6 ([#4813](https://github.com/windmill-labs/windmill/issues/4813)) ([3c99b3f](https://github.com/windmill-labs/windmill/commit/3c99b3fdc7b78b1cdc7d8fb21d999296695f7889)) | ||
| * **postgres-trigger:** postgres trigger fix circular dependencies and add remove associate resource ([#5606](https://github.com/windmill-labs/windmill/issues/5606)) ([1daeb2f](https://github.com/windmill-labs/windmill/commit/1daeb2f48f3026621b3ffc58e10f048d5911906c)) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In the postgres-trigger feature description, the phrase 'and add remove associate resource' seems unclear and potentially contains a typo. Consider revising it to something clearer such as 'fix circular dependencies and add or remove associated resource' (if that is the intended meaning).
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
6c4d67d to
8d50e1e
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 8d50e1e in 43 seconds
More details
- Looked at
58lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
2drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated correctly. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0. Ensure it matches the changelog version. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
Workflow ID: wflow_kWlWNGYdCli9HM8i
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
e25f049 to
c020b6d
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on c020b6d in 1 minute and 22 seconds
More details
- Looked at
58lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
3drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump to 1.482.0 looks correct. Confirm that it aligns with the changelog. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0; this looks correct. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:17
- Draft comment:
There's a typographical/phrasing issue in the postgres-trigger entry. The text "fix circular dependencies and add remove associate resource" is unclear. Perhaps rephrase it to something like "fix circular dependencies and remove associated resources" or clarify the intended action. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 30% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment addresses a potential clarity issue in the changelog entry, which could be important for understanding the changes made. However, changelog entries are not typically critical for code functionality, and the phrasing issue might not necessitate a code change.
The comment might be considered unimportant as it pertains to phrasing in a changelog, which does not affect the code's functionality. The changelog is more about documentation than code logic.
While the changelog is documentation, clear communication of changes is important for users and developers to understand updates. If the phrasing is genuinely unclear, it could be worth addressing.
The comment addresses a phrasing issue in the changelog, which is not directly related to code functionality. It might not be necessary to keep this comment as it doesn't require a code change.
Workflow ID: wflow_4vAwojWefvuNL2oa
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
3 times, most recently
from
2442a1a to
32b79b4
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 32b79b4 in 2 minutes and 3 seconds
More details
- Looked at
61lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
3drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version updated to 1.482.0; seems correct. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump to 1.482.0 looks correct and aligns with the changelog update. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:19
- Draft comment:
There's a potential typo in the postgres-trigger bullet: "postgres trigger fix circular dependencies and add remove associate resource". The phrase "add remove" appears ambiguous and likely should be rephrased (perhaps to "fix circular dependencies and remove associated resource" or similar) for clarity. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 30% vs. threshold = 50%
The rules say not to comment unless a code change is required, and to avoid purely informative comments. However, this is a changelog, and the comment is about a typo or unclear language in a newly added line. The comment is actionable (suggests a rewording) and is about a change in the diff. However, the rules may consider changelog wording as not important enough to warrant a comment unless it is a critical error. The ambiguity in the phrase is real, but it's not a code logic issue.
I may be overvaluing the importance of changelog clarity. The rules emphasize only commenting when a code change is required, and not for unimportant or obvious issues. Typos in changelogs may not rise to the level of requiring a comment.
However, the changelog is part of the codebase and is user-facing documentation. If the typo causes confusion, it could be worth correcting, especially since the comment is specific and actionable.
Given the rules, this comment is borderline. It is about a change in the diff and is actionable, but may not be important enough to warrant a comment. I will give it a low intermediate grade, leaning toward deletion but acknowledging some value.
Workflow ID: wflow_zUGvrw0vWqGb73ql
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
440c359 to
baf6a1b
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on baf6a1b in 1 minute and 49 seconds
More details
- Looked at
61lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
3drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Confirmed version bump to 1.482.0 is correct. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful =0%<= threshold50%
This comment is purely informative and does not provide any actionable feedback or suggestions. It simply confirms a version bump, which is not necessary for the PR author to know. It violates the rule against making purely informative comments.
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump to 1.482.0 looks correct. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:19
- Draft comment:
In the commit message for postgres-trigger, the phrase "add remove associate resource" seems off. Did you mean "remove associated resource" or something similar? - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about the wording of a commit message in the changelog, not about a code change. The rules explicitly say not to comment on PR descriptions or to make purely informative comments. There is no code change required here, and the comment is not actionable in terms of code quality or logic. This should be deleted.
Perhaps the changelog is important for documentation and clarity, and a typo could be worth correcting. However, the rules are clear about not commenting on such things unless a code change is required.
Even if the changelog is important, the rules prioritize only actionable, code-related comments. This is not actionable in the context of code changes.
The comment should be deleted because it is not about a code change and is purely informative about commit message wording. It does not meet the criteria for a useful review comment.
Workflow ID: wflow_uH3Z4K0zvJuw8wPL
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
d1d1700 to
561c939
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 561c939 in 1 minute and 42 seconds
More details
- Looked at
61lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
4drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump update to 1.482.0 looks correct. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0; this is consistent with the changelog update. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:14
- Draft comment:
In the changelog entry '* handle sending selected lines to ai context', consider capitalizing 'ai' to 'AI' for consistency with similar references in the project. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
This comment is about a stylistic change in the changelog, not about code logic or a required code change. The rules explicitly say not to make comments unless a code change is required and to avoid unimportant comments. This is a minor consistency suggestion and does not warrant a review comment per the rules.
Perhaps consistency in documentation is important, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes over minor style suggestions in documentation.
Even if consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that such minor, non-actionable comments should not be made. This is not a code logic issue.
The comment should be deleted as it is a minor, non-actionable style suggestion and does not pertain to a required code change.
4. CHANGELOG.md:8
- Draft comment:
In the changelog entry '* add gcp trigger', consider capitalizing 'gcp' to 'GCP' to maintain consistency with other similar entries and industry-standard naming. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
The comment is about capitalization in a changelog, which is a minor stylistic issue. The rules explicitly say not to make comments unless a code change is required, and not to make unimportant or purely informative comments. This is not a logic or actionable code quality issue. Therefore, the comment should be deleted.
Perhaps consistent capitalization in documentation could be important for some teams, but the rules here are clear about not commenting on such minor issues.
Even if consistency is desirable, the rules prioritize actionable, logic-related feedback over stylistic suggestions in documentation.
The comment should be deleted because it is purely stylistic and not actionable per the review rules.
Workflow ID: wflow_Lv3rOa6MqW8iEdXr
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
9eae058 to
5b26237
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 5b26237 in 1 minute and 51 seconds
More details
- Looked at
61lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
5drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Confirm that bump to 1.482.0 is intentional and consistent with the changelog. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump to 1.482.0 looks correct. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:16
- Draft comment:
Consider capitalizing 'azure' to 'Azure' in the bullet point '* make azure a standalone AI provider' to correctly reference the brand name. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
This comment is about a minor stylistic issue in a changelog, not about code logic or a required code change. The rules explicitly say not to make unimportant or purely informative comments, and this is both. There is no strong evidence that this change is required for functionality or correctness. The changelog is not a place where such minor style corrections are critical.
Perhaps consistent branding is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize actionable, necessary code changes over style in documentation.
Even if branding consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that such minor, non-functional suggestions should not be made in review comments.
The comment should be deleted as it is not actionable or necessary according to the rules.
4. CHANGELOG.md:18
- Draft comment:
The bullet '* postgres-trigger: postgres trigger fix circular dependencies and add remove associate resource' contains the phrase 'add remove associate resource'. This phrase is unclear. Consider rephrasing it, e.g., '... fix circular dependencies and remove associated resources' if that is the intended meaning. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
The rules specify not to comment on PR descriptions or changelogs unless there is a clear code change required. This comment is about wording in a changelog, not about code logic or a required code change. The comment is not actionable in terms of code, and the rules say to avoid purely informative or speculative comments. Therefore, this comment should be deleted.
Perhaps improving changelog clarity is valuable, but the rules are clear that such comments are not within scope unless they pertain to code changes.
Even if changelog clarity is important, the rules explicitly say not to comment on non-code or documentation unless a code change is required.
This comment should be deleted because it is not about a code change and is not actionable per the rules.
5. CHANGELOG.md:30
- Draft comment:
In the bullet '* frontend: app builder - force json configuration in rich result', consider capitalizing 'json' to 'JSON' for consistency since it's an acronym. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
This comment is about a stylistic change in documentation, not a code change. The rules explicitly state not to make comments that are purely informative or unimportant. Capitalizing 'json' to 'JSON' is a minor style issue and does not require a code change. Therefore, this comment should be deleted as it does not meet the criteria for actionable, required code changes.
Perhaps consistent documentation is important, and some teams may want to enforce such style even in changelogs. However, the rules here are clear about not making comments unless a code change is required.
Even if documentation consistency is valued, the rules for this review are strict and do not allow for purely stylistic or informative comments in changelogs.
The comment should be deleted because it is a minor, purely stylistic suggestion in documentation and does not require a code change, which is against the review rules.
Workflow ID: wflow_hmNrrHfNfGdnyybL
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
a259435 to
6dcebe8
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 6dcebe8 in 59 seconds
More details
- Looked at
61lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
4drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0; ensure consistency in release process. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0. Ensure consistency with the release notes. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:16
- Draft comment:
Typographical error: In the bullet "make azure a standalone AI provider", 'azure' should be capitalized as 'Azure'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful =0%<= threshold50%
This comment is purely informative and focuses on a typographical error in a bullet point. It does not provide a code suggestion or address a potential issue in the code itself. According to the rules, purely informative comments should be removed.
4. CHANGELOG.md:18
- Draft comment:
Typographical error: In the commit message "postgres-trigger: postgres trigger fix circular dependencies and add remove associate resource", the phrase "add remove" is unclear and likely a typo. Please review and correct it (perhaps it should be 'and remove associated resource' or similar). - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful =0%<= threshold50%
The comment is pointing out a typographical error in the commit message. While it is specific, it is not related to the code itself but rather to the commit message. According to the rules, comments should focus on the code changes rather than commit messages or descriptions. Therefore, this comment should be removed.
Workflow ID: wflow_dOY8tWyd13EGhwPI
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
force-pushed
the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
from
42a578a to
a9f87d8
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on a9f87d8 in 41 seconds
More details
- Looked at
62lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
3drafted comments based on config settings.
1. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump updated to 1.482.0. Ensure it is consistent with the changelog release version. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
2. version.txt:1
- Draft comment:
Version bump to 1.482.0 is correct. Ensure this is synchronized with the changelog. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%<= threshold50%
None
3. CHANGELOG.md:19
- Draft comment:
Minor typo: In the postgres-trigger commit message, consider using 'associated resource' instead of 'associate resource' for clarity. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful =0%<= threshold50%
This comment is purely informative and suggests a minor change in the commit message for clarity. It doesn't address any code issues or improvements.
Workflow ID: wflow_funIZYXrD28OKyPx
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
rubenfiszel
deleted the
release-please--branches--main--components--windmill
branch
Contributor
Author
|
🤖 Release is at https://github.com/windmill-labs/windmill/releases/tag/v1.482.0 🌻 |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
🤖 I have created a release beep boop
1.482.0 (2025-04-15)
Features
Bug Fixes
This PR was generated with Release Please. See documentation.
Important
Release 1.482.0 with new features like diff toggle, GCP trigger, and Svelte 5 migration, plus various bug fixes.
version.txtto 1.482.0.${}syntax support in bash without default.//nativeand list jobs by tag.This description was created by
for a9f87d8. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.