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

Update 1 NuGet dependencies #360

Conversation

nfbot
Copy link
Member

@nfbot nfbot commented Dec 11, 2024

Bumps nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem from 1.1.54 to 1.1.66

[version update]

⚠️ This is an automated update. ⚠️

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features
    • Updated the nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem dependency to version 1.1.66 across multiple projects, potentially introducing new features and improvements.
  • Bug Fixes
    • The new version may include bug fixes and performance enhancements related to file system operations.

Bumps nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem from 1.1.54 to 1.1.66</br>
[version update]

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

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 11, 2024

Walkthrough

The pull request updates the packages.lock.json files across multiple projects to change the version of the nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem dependency from 1.1.54 to 1.1.66. This change affects several projects, including Tests/FireTestApp, Tests/M5Core2TestApp, Tests/M5CoreTestApp, Tests/ToughTestApp, nanoFramework.Fire, nanoFramework.M5Core, nanoFramework.M5Core2, and nanoFramework.Tough. All other dependencies remain unchanged.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
Tests/FireTestApp/packages.lock.json Updated nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem from 1.1.54 to 1.1.66.
Tests/M5Core2TestApp/packages.lock.json Updated nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem from 1.1.54 to 1.1.66.
Tests/M5CoreTestApp/packages.lock.json Updated nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem from 1.1.54 to 1.1.66.
Tests/ToughTestApp/packages.lock.json Updated nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem from 1.1.54 to 1.1.66.
nanoFramework.Fire/packages.lock.json Updated nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem from 1.1.54 to 1.1.66.
nanoFramework.M5Core/packages.lock.json Updated nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem from 1.1.54 to 1.1.66.
nanoFramework.M5Core2/packages.lock.json Updated nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem from 1.1.54 to 1.1.66.
nanoFramework.Tough/packages.lock.json Updated nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem from 1.1.54 to 1.1.66.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

CI: Publish Release


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.

Copy link

@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 (1)
nanoFramework.Fire/packages.lock.json (1)

145-147: LGTM! Dependency update is complete and consistent.

The version update to 1.1.66 has been consistently applied across all package files.

Consider setting up automated dependency updates with Dependabot or similar tools to streamline future updates.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b1cc7f4 and b867025.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (20)
  • Tests/FireTestApp/FireTestApp.nfproj is excluded by none and included by none
  • Tests/FireTestApp/packages.config is excluded by none and included by none
  • Tests/M5Core2TestApp/M5Core2TestApp.nfproj is excluded by none and included by none
  • Tests/M5Core2TestApp/packages.config is excluded by none and included by none
  • Tests/M5CoreTestApp/M5CoreTestApp.nfproj is excluded by none and included by none
  • Tests/M5CoreTestApp/packages.config is excluded by none and included by none
  • Tests/ToughTestApp/ToughTestApp.nfproj is excluded by none and included by none
  • Tests/ToughTestApp/packages.config is excluded by none and included by none
  • nanoFramework.Fire.nuspec is excluded by none and included by none
  • nanoFramework.Fire/nanoFramework.Fire.nfproj is excluded by none and included by none
  • nanoFramework.Fire/packages.config is excluded by none and included by none
  • nanoFramework.M5Core.nuspec is excluded by none and included by none
  • nanoFramework.M5Core/nanoFramework.M5Core.nfproj is excluded by none and included by none
  • nanoFramework.M5Core/packages.config is excluded by none and included by none
  • nanoFramework.M5Core2.nuspec is excluded by none and included by none
  • nanoFramework.M5Core2/nanoFramework.M5Core2.nfproj is excluded by none and included by none
  • nanoFramework.M5Core2/packages.config is excluded by none and included by none
  • nanoFramework.Tough.nuspec is excluded by none and included by none
  • nanoFramework.Tough/nanoFramework.Tough.nfproj is excluded by none and included by none
  • nanoFramework.Tough/packages.config is excluded by none and included by none
📒 Files selected for processing (8)
  • Tests/FireTestApp/packages.lock.json (1 hunks)
  • Tests/M5Core2TestApp/packages.lock.json (1 hunks)
  • Tests/M5CoreTestApp/packages.lock.json (1 hunks)
  • Tests/ToughTestApp/packages.lock.json (1 hunks)
  • nanoFramework.Fire/packages.lock.json (1 hunks)
  • nanoFramework.M5Core/packages.lock.json (1 hunks)
  • nanoFramework.M5Core2/packages.lock.json (1 hunks)
  • nanoFramework.Tough/packages.lock.json (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (7)
Tests/ToughTestApp/packages.lock.json (1)

85-87: LGTM! Dependency version update is consistent.

The update of nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem from 1.1.54 to 1.1.66 is properly reflected in the package.lock.json file.

Let's verify if this version update introduces any breaking changes:

✅ Verification successful

Version update is safe to proceed

Based on the release notes for v1.1.66, there are no breaking changes introduced. The update includes bug fixes for SD card handling and improvements to unit tests, which are non-breaking changes.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for breaking changes in the changelog or release notes

# Search for breaking changes in recent commits
gh api graphql -f query='
{
  repository(owner: "nanoframework", name: "System.IO.FileSystem") {
    releases(first: 1, orderBy: {field: CREATED_AT, direction: DESC}) {
      nodes {
        tagName
        description
      }
    }
  }
}'

Length of output: 657

nanoFramework.Tough/packages.lock.json (1)

109-111: LGTM! Version update matches other projects.

The dependency update is consistent with other package.lock.json files in the solution.

Tests/M5CoreTestApp/packages.lock.json (1)

121-123: LGTM! Dependency version is synchronized.

The update to nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem 1.1.66 is consistent across all projects.

Tests/FireTestApp/packages.lock.json (1)

139-141: LGTM! Verify the version compatibility.

The version update for nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem is correctly specified with matching requested and resolved versions.

Let's verify if this is the latest stable version and check for any known issues:

✅ Verification successful

LGTM! Version 1.1.66 is not the latest but it's a stable version.

Based on the NuGet feed check, version 1.1.66 is a stable release version, though there is a newer version 1.1.9 available. The version specified in the packages.lock.json is consistent with both requested and resolved versions.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the version of nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem

# Check NuGet feed for latest version
curl -s https://api.nuget.org/v3-flatcontainer/nanoframework.system.io.filesystem/index.json | jq -r '.versions[]' | sort -r | head -n 5

# Look for changelog or release notes
fd -g CHANGELOG.md -x cat {} 2>/dev/null

Length of output: 65741

nanoFramework.M5Core/packages.lock.json (1)

133-135: LGTM! Changes are consistent.

The version update matches across files, maintaining consistency in the dependency upgrade.

Tests/M5Core2TestApp/packages.lock.json (1)

145-147: Verify the impact of the FileSystem package update

The update from 1.1.54 to 1.1.66 is a significant version jump. Let's verify the changelog and any breaking changes.

nanoFramework.M5Core2/packages.lock.json (1)

151-153: LGTM! Version update is consistent

The nanoFramework.System.IO.FileSystem package version update is consistent with the test project and matches the PR objectives.

@networkfusion
Copy link
Member

I have closed it as there were no changes (and out dated).

@networkfusion networkfusion deleted the nfbot/update-dependencies/ed6111bb-2ca9-40ab-87a9-afe8a1d849f2 branch December 13, 2024 00:25
@AdrianSoundy
Copy link
Member

No problem. I was just going to let it finish :-)

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.

3 participants