Fix missing Docker publish step for R sandbox in workflow

[aeeeeeep]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Extended Docker build configuration with an additional container image variant.

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

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Draft detected.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Walkthrough

A new Docker build matrix entry for dockers/r451.Dockerfile with image tag sandbox-r-451-bullseye is added to the GitHub Actions workflow. All existing entries and workflow steps remain unchanged, extending the set of Docker images built and published.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Change Summary
GitHub Actions Docker Workflow \.github/workflows/docker-publish\.yml	Added new matrix entry for dockers/r451.Dockerfile with image sandbox-r-451-bullseye; all existing entries and steps preserved

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

• Single, additive configuration change to YAML
• No logic, dependency, or step modifications
• Straightforward pattern extension (adding one matrix entry)

Poem

🐰 A new Docker builds with pride today,
sandbox-r-451 joins the fray!
The matrix grows, workflows run true,
Building images both bright and new! 🐳✨

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

✅ 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 clearly and concisely identifies the main change: adding a missing Docker publish step for an R sandbox in the workflow file.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

---

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.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.4%. Comparing base (d7ab759) to head (674c44b).

Additional details and impacted files

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##            main    #123   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage   93.4%   93.4%           
=====================================
  Files         31      31           
  Lines       1952    1952           
  Branches     225     225           
=====================================
  Hits        1824    1824           
  Misses        66      66           
  Partials      62      62           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[vndee]

Hey @aeeeeeep, I don't know why, but the R image took too long to build, so I decided to disable this CI. I'll manually build and publish this image if needed. Have you tried building it on your local machine? How long does it take now?

[aeeeeeep]

Yes, I built locally and executed the test cases successfully. I noticed that many R libraries needed to be compiled, which made me wait for over 1 hour. I was unable to use the R docker image you released; see #122
I'll see if I can modify the Dockerfile to speed up the compilation. Please wait a moment.

[vndee]

Yes, I'm not familiar with R, so it would be great if you could help me optimize the Dockerfile.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[aeeeeeep]

@vndee I tried using pak to verify parallel installation locally, but my network environment is too poor.

Failed to update system requirement mappings, will use cached mappings

Could you please help verify the benefits of docker build -t sandbox-r-451-bullseye_speedup -f dockers/r451.Dockerfile .?

[vndee]

@vndee I tried using pak to verify parallel installation locally, but my network environment is too poor.

Failed to update system requirement mappings, will use cached mappings

Could you please help verify the benefits of docker build -t sandbox-r-451-bullseye_speedup -f dockers/r451.Dockerfile .?

Yes, will do it ASAP.