Skip to content

fix/lint-scripts - #6

Open
Marcelo-Rosas wants to merge 1 commit into
thaleslaray:mainfrom
Marcelo-Rosas:patch-1
Open

fix/lint-scripts#6
Marcelo-Rosas wants to merge 1 commit into
thaleslaray:mainfrom
Marcelo-Rosas:patch-1

Conversation

@Marcelo-Rosas

@Marcelo-Rosas Marcelo-Rosas commented Dec 28, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

fix: add lint:ci and lint:fix scripts

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Added new npm scripts: lint:ci and lint:fix for linting operations, and test:all for running complete test suite with end-to-end tests.

✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.

fix: add lint:ci and lint:fix scripts
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Dec 28, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Three new npm scripts were added to package.json: lint:ci and lint:fix for linting operations, and test:all for running the combined test suite. These expand the available npm script surface for build and test orchestration.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
NPM Scripts Addition
package.json
Added three new script entries: lint:ci (runs next lint), lint:fix (runs next lint --fix), and test:all (chains npm run test with npm run test:e2e).

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Poem

🐰 Hop hop, the scripts now grow,
Lint and test with a flowing go,
CI doors unlock so bright,
All tests together, a unified flight!

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)
Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Title check ❓ Inconclusive The title 'fix/lint-scripts' is vague and does not clearly describe the main change; it reads like a branch name rather than a descriptive PR title. Use a more descriptive title that clearly explains the change, such as 'Add lint:ci and lint:fix npm scripts' to make the purpose immediately clear.
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment

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

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

@coderabbitai coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
package.json (1)

12-13: LGTM! Consider enhancing lint:ci for stricter CI enforcement.

The lint:fix script is a solid addition for local development. The lint:ci script provides semantic clarity, though it currently mirrors the base lint command.

💡 Optional: Make CI linting stricter

You might want to make lint:ci fail on warnings in CI environments:

-    "lint:ci": "next lint",
+    "lint:ci": "next lint --max-warnings 0",

This ensures that warnings don't accumulate in the codebase over time.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 3221a89 and 03d8693.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • package.json
🔇 Additional comments (1)
package.json (1)

22-22: LGTM! Verify fail-fast behavior is intentional.

The test:all script correctly chains unit and E2E tests. The && operator means E2E tests will only run if unit tests pass, which is typically the desired behavior for comprehensive test runs.

If you prefer to run both test suites regardless of individual failures (for complete CI reporting), you could use & (parallel) or ; (sequential without fail-fast) instead of &&.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant