fix: wrong struct type

[jeluard]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Updated rate-limit configuration structure from a single numeric value to a table format with separate settings for new and existing packages, requiring configuration file updates.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 6f14c2dd-4700-436b-bd6b-ea744a4e83c3

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 928aa90 and 419893c.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• release.toml

---

Walkthrough

The release.toml configuration file transitions the rate-limit setting from a single scalar value to a structured table format, splitting it into new-packages and existing-packages fields—both set to 20. This restructures the configuration schema while preserving existing behavior across other settings.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Rate-limit Configuration Restructure release.toml	Converted scalar rate-limit = 20 into a structured [rate-limit] table with separate new-packages and existing-packages fields, both set to 20. Schema change that enables differentiated rate-limit handling.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~5 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• fix: allow for first release #711: Introduced the original scalar rate-limit configuration that this PR restructures into a more granular table format with package-type differentiation.

Poem

🎬 The rate-limit's had a glow-up, mate,
From scalar to a structured state,
New packages and the old ones too,
Now get their own config view! 🎮

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately describes the main change: converting a scalar rate-limit setting to a structured table with proper type definition, fixing the configuration structure.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment
• Commit unit tests in branch jeluard/release-limit

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Updates the cargo-release workspace configuration to use the newer structured rate-limit configuration format.

Changes:

• Replaces scalar rate-limit = 20 with a structured rate-limit configuration containing separate limits for new vs existing packages.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[Copilot]

Defining [rate-limit] here turns all subsequent keys (e.g. pre-release-commit-message, tag-message, tag-name) into fields of the rate-limit table in TOML, which likely breaks cargo-release config parsing. Use dotted keys (rate-limit.new-packages, rate-limit.existing-packages), an inline table (rate-limit = { ... }), or move the [rate-limit] table to the end of the file so later settings remain top-level.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
see 6 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.