Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello @backkem, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request significantly enhances the project's continuous integration capabilities by introducing dedicated workflows for linting, building, and testing. It also provides a robust integration test script, laying the groundwork for more comprehensive automated testing and ensuring higher code quality and stability. Highlights
🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console. Ignored Files
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request introduces CI workflows, including a new integration test script. The script is well-structured, using set -euo pipefail and a trap for cleanup, which are great practices. I've provided a few suggestions to improve the robustness and maintainability of the test script. Specifically, I've recommended replacing a fixed sleep with a more reliable polling mechanism to wait for the receiver service, correcting a misleading comment, and quoting a variable in a test condition to follow shell scripting best practices.
|
Hmm, let me know if we want to keep |
Conceptually, yes, having an integration test run would be great. However, I'd probably rewrite it in python so it can be used identically on Windows hosts as well. To do it reliably in Actions runners, docker-in-docker with a compose file may actually be cleanest setup that translates between local / actions consistently. |
|
Added some fixes to make the lint happy. |
|
@kaidokert could you approve another CI run? |
|
Thanks ! |
Summary
lint.yml: rustfmt and clippy checksci.yml: workspace build and test