ENGCB-379 - Update README file with Publishing instructions. - #78
ENGCB-379 - Update README file with Publishing instructions.#78eduardoyuidy wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughUpdated README publishing instructions to replace the previous prerelease note with a three-flow publishing workflow: Alpha (alpha tag, -alpha.x versions), Beta/Release Candidate (beta tag, PRs to release-candidate branches), and Stable (latest tag, merge to master), with explicit version formats and NPM permission notes. Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
README.md (1)
36-36: Consider centralizing the NPM Publisher List note to reduce repetition.The same long parenthetical appears three times. A short shared note (once under
## Publishing) will make steps easier to scan.Also applies to: 46-46, 55-55
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@README.md` at line 36, The three identical parenthetical publisher-note occurrences after the publish steps (e.g., the one following "Run `npm publish --tag alpha`") should be removed and replaced with a short pointer like "(see Publishing note)" in each step, and a single consolidated paragraph titled "Publishing" should be added (or updated) that contains the full NPM Publisher List instructions and link; update the instances for the alpha, beta and stable publish steps to reference that single note to avoid repetition.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@README.md`:
- Line 44: Replace the escaped, hard-to-read pattern
"\"\**/*release-candidate\*\"" with a plain inline code glob pattern for
clarity: use `**/*release-candidate*` (no extra backslashes or surrounding
quotes) in the README text so the branch pattern is easy to read and copy.
- Line 40: Fix the subject-verb agreement in the README sentence "services that
uses the library" by changing "uses" to "use" so the line reads "services that
use the library"; locate the phrase in README.md (the sentence starting "In some
rare situations we need to test Library changes versions on a few services in
Production, before rolling out this change to all services that uses the
library.") and update it accordingly.
---
Nitpick comments:
In `@README.md`:
- Line 36: The three identical parenthetical publisher-note occurrences after
the publish steps (e.g., the one following "Run `npm publish --tag alpha`")
should be removed and replaced with a short pointer like "(see Publishing note)"
in each step, and a single consolidated paragraph titled "Publishing" should be
added (or updated) that contains the full NPM Publisher List instructions and
link; update the instances for the alpha, beta and stable publish steps to
reference that single note to avoid repetition.
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
|
Won't need this anymore. |
Description of changes
README.mdpublishing instructions:neo library publish(CodeBuild) withnpm publish --tag alpha(manual).npm publish --tag beta(manual).npm publish --tag latest(manual).Why
As this public repository we won't be using automatic publishing through the package publisher CodeBuild pipeline. - Relevant thread with Cyber Sec (Private channel)
Related PRs
Checklist
[ ] Have you fully tested your PR locally?[ ] Have you made a CHANGELOG entry?Summary by CodeRabbit