ci: update commit-check-action to v2.13.1, pinned by digest - #54
Merged
Conversation
v2.11.1 predates stable rule IDs, so failures here report 'Type subject_imperative' with no ID, no docs link, and the old bare comment header. #53 hit that live: a commit message leading with 'cut' was rejected, and the advice offered was to stop using a past tense it had not used. Pinned by digest with the version in a comment, matching actions/checkout two lines above and the workflow in commit-check itself. Engine still 2.13.4, so the imperative fix from commit-check#540 arrives here when 2.14.0 ships and the action picks it up.
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe commit-check workflow now uses commit-check v2.13.1, pinned to commit ChangesCommit-check workflow update
Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
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. Comment |
Commit Check✅ All 3 checks passed Show all 3 checkscommit-check 2.13.4 · Rules reference |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
One line:
@v2.11.1→@562a184b2b8e583e757b17eb385bc48370f44547 # v2.13.1.v2.13.1 is the current release (2026-08-07), and the digest is the one the tag resolves to — checked against the tag ref rather than copied.
Why it was worth doing
v2.11.1 predates stable rule IDs, so this repo's own PR checks report failures in the old format — no
CC0xxID, no docs link, and a bare# Commit-Check ✔️comment with no table or per-scope breakdown.#53 ran into it live. A commit message leading with
cutwas rejected, and the advice offered was:cutis the imperative. The rule was reporting a past tense that was never written, because the verb simply was not on the list — which is the whole of commit-check#526.Pinned by digest
actions/checkouttwo lines above is already digest-pinned with the version in a comment, and so is the commit-check workflow in commit-check itself. This line was the odd one out; now it matches. Tag pins are movable, which is the thing digest pinning exists to prevent.What this does not fix
The engine is still
commit-check==2.13.4, so the imperative-mood rewrite from commit-check#540 is not in this bump — the action's version does not track the engine's. It arrives here once 2.14.0 ships and the action picks it up. Until then a subject led by an unlisted verb can still be rejected in this repo; it will just be reported more legibly.Noted, not changed
The trigger includes
edited, which fires on description edits, not only title edits — so every bot summary edit costs a full run. A gate likeif: github.event.action != 'edited' || github.event.changes.title != nullwould cut that, but it changes when checks run, so I left it to you.🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_01U9zFxq8V4qxG4aMzJhGBFn
Generated by Claude Code
Summary by CodeRabbit