Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix WASM bindings release workflow #1195

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 28, 2024
Merged

Fix WASM bindings release workflow #1195

merged 1 commit into from
Oct 28, 2024

Conversation

rygine
Copy link
Collaborator

@rygine rygine commented Oct 28, 2024

Summary

  • Use official GitHub runner for publishing with provenance
  • Install wasm-bindgen and wasm-opt before building

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Updated the workflow configuration for releasing WASM bindings to simplify the environment specification.
    • Added a new step to install wasm-bindgen and wasm-opt tools efficiently.

@rygine rygine requested a review from a team as a code owner October 28, 2024 17:16
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 28, 2024

Walkthrough

The pull request modifies the workflow configuration for releasing WASM bindings. It changes the environment from warp-ubuntu-latest-x64-16x to ubuntu-latest, simplifying the setup. Additionally, it introduces a step to install wasm-bindgen and wasm-opt using a single action. The remaining workflow steps, including code checkout, Rust toolchain updates, caching, Node.js setup, dependency installation, project building, and NPM publishing, remain unchanged.

Changes

File Change Summary
.github/workflows/release-wasm-bindings.yml Updated runs-on environment to ubuntu-latest and added step for installing wasm-bindgen and wasm-opt using taiki-e/install-action@v2.

Possibly related PRs

  • Prepare WASM bindings for release #1176: The main PR modifies the existing release-wasm-bindings.yml workflow, while the retrieved PR introduces this workflow, indicating a direct connection in the context of WASM bindings release processes.

Suggested reviewers

  • insipx

🐇 In the meadow, the rabbit hops,
With WASM bindings, the fun never stops!
From warp to ubuntu, a smooth little glide,
Installing tools, with joy we abide.
Let's build and publish, with a cheerful cheer,
For every change brings us closer, my dear! 🌼


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
.github/workflows/release-wasm-bindings.yml (2)

29-32: Consider pinning exact action version and verifying tool versions

While the installation step is well-structured, consider these improvements:

  1. Pin the action to an exact version (e.g., taiki-e/[email protected]) for better reproducibility
  2. Add a version verification step after installation

Add this verification step:

      - name: Verify WASM tools
        run: |
          wasm-bindgen --version
          wasm-opt --version

Line range hint 1-63: Consider adding robustness checks to the workflow

To make the release process more reliable, consider adding:

  1. Version validation to ensure the package version hasn't been published
  2. Retry logic for the publish step in case of temporary NPM registry issues

Example implementation:

      - name: Validate version
        working-directory: bindings_wasm
        run: |
          PKG_VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
          if npm view @xmtp/wasm-bindings@$PKG_VERSION version; then
            echo "Version $PKG_VERSION already exists"
            exit 1
          fi

      - name: Publish to NPM
        uses: JS-DevTools/npm-publish@v3
        with:
          token: ${{ secrets.NPM_TOKEN }}
          package: bindings_wasm
          retry: 3
          retry-delay: 10000
        env:
          GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between ef63451 and 70dc2f7.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .github/workflows/release-wasm-bindings.yml (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
.github/workflows/release-wasm-bindings.yml (1)

13-13: LGTM! Enhanced security with GitHub-hosted runner

Using ubuntu-latest instead of a custom runner is a good security practice for publishing workflows, as it ensures better supply chain security through GitHub's official infrastructure and enables NPM package provenance.

@rygine rygine merged commit 3548d30 into main Oct 28, 2024
4 checks passed
@rygine rygine deleted the rygine/release-test branch October 28, 2024 18:56
insipx pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 29, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants