chore(ci): run cargo semver checks on PRs

[kumarUjjawal]

Description

Added a new Github workflow to run cargo semvar checks on every PR.

Closes #357

[seqre]

Thank you for your contribution @kumarUjjawal! Instead of it being a separate workflow, please add it to our Rust CI workflow as another job!

[kumarUjjawal]

Thank you for your contribution @kumarUjjawal! Instead of it being a separate workflow, please add it to our Rust CI workflow as another job!

Ok Sure!

[kumarUjjawal]

@seqre Should I add if after the miri ?

[seqre]

@kumarUjjawal, just add it at the end, but make it require our Build & test job.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Flag	Coverage Δ
rust	89.25% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

see 1 file with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[m4tx]

Two cents from me:

1. I don't think we should compare with the latest tag. We should compare with PR's destination branch (usually master, but could be something else), so that we only get warnings/errors about current PR, rather than everything since the last release (which isn't very informative, especially when there's a lot of changes since the last release).
2. I think it would be ideal for this to create a GitHub comment with a summary of the checks (similarly to what codecov creates). However, if this would require a non-trivial amount of work, I'm fine with keeping this as is now—as a check in our workflow (which fails if there's a non-zero number of errors). (any thoughts on this @seqre?)

[kumarUjjawal]

Two cents from me:

1. I don't think we should compare with the latest tag. We should compare with PR's destination branch (usually master, but could be something else), so that we only get warnings/errors about current PR, rather than everything since the last release (which isn't very informative, especially when there's a lot of changes since the last release).

Does this aligns with what you intended?

- name: Determine merge base
  id: merge_base
  run: |
    git fetch origin ${{ github.base_ref || 'master' }}
    echo "base=$(git merge-base HEAD origin/${{ github.base_ref || 'main' }})" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT

2. I think it would be ideal for this to create a GitHub comment with a summary of the checks (similarly to what codecov creates). However, if this would require a non-trivial amount of work, I'm fine with keeping this as is now—as a check in our workflow (which fails if there's a non-zero number of errors). (any thoughts on this @seqre?)

I will wait for @seqre for the comments about this one.

[seqre]

Regarding the above question, I'd skip the automatic comment creation for now. In most cases, there should not be violations, so that comment would only clutter the conversation. In the few instances where there is an unexpected violation, we can simply check the job logs.

[seqre]

LGTM! We'll just have to test it now and see if it works

[m4tx]

@kumarUjjawal the workflow does not run:

The workflow is not valid. .github/workflows/rust.yml (Line: 384, Col: 9): Unexpected value '' .github/workflows/rust.yml (Line: 385, Col: 5): Unexpected value 'RUSTC_WRAPPER'

https://github.com/cot-rs/cot/actions/runs/16079459652

Please fix the issue and then we should be able to merge this.

[kumarUjjawal]

@kumarUjjawal the workflow does not run:

The workflow is not valid. .github/workflows/rust.yml (Line: 384, Col: 9): Unexpected value '' .github/workflows/rust.yml (Line: 385, Col: 5): Unexpected value 'RUSTC_WRAPPER'

https://github.com/cot-rs/cot/actions/runs/16079459652

Please fix the issue and then we should be able to merge this.

There was an identation issue, should work now.

[m4tx]

Looks good to me, thanks a lot for the contribution!