Skip to content

Conversation

@nfbot
Copy link
Member

@nfbot nfbot commented Dec 10, 2024

Bumps nanoFramework.Benchmark from 1.0.80 to 1.0.81
Bumps nanoFramework.Logging from 1.1.113 to 1.1.120

[version update]

⚠️ This is an automated update. ⚠️

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Updated dependency versions for nanoFramework.Benchmark and nanoFramework.Logging.

Bumps nanoFramework.Benchmark from 1.0.80 to 1.0.81</br>Bumps nanoFramework.Logging from 1.1.113 to 1.1.120</br>
[version update]

### ⚠️ This is an automated update. ⚠️
@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 10, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes in this pull request involve updates to the dependency versions in the packages.lock.json file for the nanoFramework.System.Math.Benchmark project. Specifically, the versions for nanoFramework.Benchmark and nanoFramework.Logging have been incremented, while other dependencies remain unchanged.

Changes

File Change Summary
nanoFramework.System.Math.Benchmark/packages.lock.json Updated nanoFramework.Benchmark from 1.0.80 to 1.0.81 and nanoFramework.Logging from 1.1.113 to 1.1.120, including new content hashes.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant User
    participant Application
    participant DependencyManager

    User->>Application: Request to update dependencies
    Application->>DependencyManager: Check for updates
    DependencyManager->>Application: Found updates for Benchmark and Logging
    Application->>DependencyManager: Update Benchmark to 1.0.81
    Application->>DependencyManager: Update Logging to 1.1.120
    DependencyManager-->>Application: Updates applied
    Application-->>User: Dependencies updated successfully
Loading

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between e556d5b and 47afaf7.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
  • nanoFramework.System.Math.Benchmark/nanoFramework.System.Math.Benchmark.nfproj is excluded by none and included by none
  • nanoFramework.System.Math.Benchmark/packages.config is excluded by none and included by none
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • nanoFramework.System.Math.Benchmark/packages.lock.json (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
nanoFramework.System.Math.Benchmark/packages.lock.json (3)

7-9: LGTM: nanoFramework.Benchmark version update is correct

The update from 1.0.80 to 1.0.81 is properly specified with exact version matching and includes the corresponding content hash.


19-21: LGTM: nanoFramework.Logging version update is correct

The update from 1.1.113 to 1.1.120 is properly specified with exact version matching and includes the corresponding content hash.


7-9: Verify the updated package versions

Let's confirm these versions exist in the official NuGet feed and check for any known issues.

Also applies to: 19-21

✅ Verification successful

✅ Package versions verified and compatible

Both packages exist in the official NuGet feed with matching versions:

  • nanoFramework.Benchmark 1.0.81
  • nanoFramework.Logging 1.1.120

The packages have compatible dependencies and no reported issues were found in the repository. The dependency chain is consistent as nanoFramework.Benchmark 1.0.81 already includes nanoFramework.Logging 1.1.120 as a dependency.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify package versions exist and check for any issues
# Note: Using curl to query NuGet API for package information

echo "Checking nanoFramework.Benchmark 1.0.81..."
curl -s "https://api.nuget.org/v3-flatcontainer/nanoframework.benchmark/1.0.81/nanoframework.benchmark.nuspec"

echo -e "\nChecking nanoFramework.Logging 1.1.120..."
curl -s "https://api.nuget.org/v3-flatcontainer/nanoframework.logging/1.1.120/nanoframework.logging.nuspec"

# Check for any GitHub issues mentioning these versions
gh api graphql -f query='
{
  search(query: "repo:nanoframework/System.Math is:issue nanoFramework.Benchmark 1.0.81 OR nanoFramework.Logging 1.1.120", type: ISSUE, first: 5) {
    nodes {
      ... on Issue {
        title
        url
        state
      }
    }
  }
}'

Length of output: 3570


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 generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Experiment)
  • @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.

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

@nfbot nfbot merged commit 62c8ba7 into main Dec 10, 2024
7 checks passed
@nfbot nfbot deleted the nfbot/update-dependencies/7980a0fb-fcd5-423f-ac17-111ee2df1eb4 branch December 10, 2024 11:16
This was referenced Jan 27, 2025
This was referenced Mar 10, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants