Chore/setup #1
Chore/setup #1
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes introduce a comprehensive setup for the "jackal-auth-proxy" Go application, including new workflows for building, testing, and publishing Docker images. A command-line interface (CLI) is established, along with version management and linting configurations. The project structure is refined with updated documentation, a Makefile for build automation, and a multi-stage Dockerfile for efficient image creation. Additionally, various GitHub Actions workflows are added to automate dependency updates, code linting, testing, and releases, ensuring streamlined development and deployment processes. Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant GitHub
participant Docker
participant GoApp
User->>GitHub: Push changes
GitHub->>GitHub: Trigger workflows
GitHub->>GoApp: Run tests
GoApp->>GoApp: Build application
GitHub->>Docker: Build Docker image
Docker->>Docker: Publish Docker image
GitHub->>User: Notify completion
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? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
|
This pull request sets up GitHub code scanning for this repository. Once the scans have completed and the checks have passed, the analysis results for this pull request branch will appear on this overview. Once you merge this pull request, the 'Security' tab will show more code scanning analysis results (for example, for the default branch). Depending on your configuration and choice of analysis tool, future pull requests will be annotated with code scanning analysis results. For more information about GitHub code scanning, check out the documentation. |
amimart
force-pushed
the
chore/setup
branch
from
612e8e2
to
a0efd4f
Compare
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 6
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (43)
.dockerignore (1)
1-2: LGTM! Consider adding more common ignore patterns.The current
.dockerignorefile correctly excludes thetarget/build directory and.github/folder, which is a good start. These entries align well with the PR objective of setting up the DevOps structure and CI processes.Consider adding more common ignore patterns that are typically useful for Go projects:
target/ .github/ +*.log +*.md +.gitignore +.dockerignore +Dockerfile +.env* +*.testThese additional patterns will help:
- Exclude log files, markdown documents, and environment files that are not needed in the image.
- Prevent the Dockerfile itself and the .dockerignore file from being added to the build context.
- Exclude test files to keep the image lean.
This will further optimize your Docker builds and reduce the image size.
.gitignore (1)
1-4: LGTM! Consider adding more common entries.The additions to the
.gitignorefile are appropriate and beneficial:
target/helps avoid committing build artifacts..idea/prevents IDE-specific settings from being tracked..DS_Storeensures macOS-specific files are ignored.These changes will help maintain a clean repository across different development environments and operating systems.
Consider adding more common entries to make the
.gitignorefile more comprehensive. Here's a suggestion:target/ .idea/ .vscode/ .DS_Store +# Logs +*.log +# Dependency directories +node_modules/ +# Environment files +.env +.env.local +# Binary files +*.exe +*.dll +*.so +*.dylibThese additional entries cover common scenarios across various project types and can help prevent accidental commits of sensitive or unnecessary files.
main.go (2)
12-16: Consider adding error handling forcmd.Execute().The
mainfunction is well-structured with proper logging setup. The use ofzerologwith console output to stderr is a good choice for development and debugging.However, it's recommended to add error handling for the
cmd.Execute()call. This would allow for graceful shutdown and proper error reporting if the command execution fails.Consider modifying the
mainfunction as follows:func main() { log.Logger = log.Output(zerolog.ConsoleWriter{Out: os.Stderr}) - cmd.Execute() + if err := cmd.Execute(); err != nil { + log.Error().Err(err).Msg("Command execution failed") + os.Exit(1) + } }This change will log any errors that occur during command execution and exit with a non-zero status code, which is useful for scripts or CI/CD pipelines that may be running this application.
1-16: Overall, themain.gofile provides a solid foundation for the CLI application.The file successfully establishes a minimal yet functional entry point for the application, aligning well with the PR objectives. The use of
zerologfor logging and the separation of command logic into acmdpackage demonstrate good software engineering practices. These choices will contribute to the maintainability and scalability of the project as it grows.To further improve the code:
- Consider adding a brief comment at the top of the file explaining its purpose as the entry point for the jackal-auth-proxy application.
- If not already present in the
cmdpackage, ensure that there's proper documentation for theExecute()function to explain what it does and how it should be used.Dockerfile (3)
1-8: Build stage looks good, with room for optimization.The build stage is well-structured, using a specific Go version and ensuring a statically linked binary. However, consider optimizing the build context.
Consider using a
.dockerignorefile to exclude unnecessary files from the build context. This can speed up the build process and reduce the image size. For example:# .dockerignore .git .github *.mdAlso, you might want to consider using Go modules for dependency management if not already implemented.
10-17: Image stage is well-structured, with minor suggestions.The image stage effectively creates a minimal production image using Alpine. The multi-stage build is implemented correctly.
Consider the following suggestions:
Add a non-root user for running the application:
RUN adduser -D appuser USER appuserInclude a
CMDinstruction to allow for easier overriding of arguments:ENTRYPOINT ["/usr/bin/jackal-auth-proxy"] CMD []Consider adding labels for better image metadata:
LABEL maintainer="Your Name <[email protected]>" LABEL version="1.0" LABEL description="Jackal Auth Proxy"If
/optis not specifically required, consider using/appas the working directory, which is a common convention:WORKDIR /app
1-17: Overall, the Dockerfile is well-structured with room for minor improvements.The multi-stage build process and use of Alpine as the base image are excellent choices for creating a minimal and efficient Docker image.
Consider the following general improvements:
Add a
.dockerignorefile to optimize the build context.Include health checks to improve container orchestration:
HEALTHCHECK CMD ["/usr/bin/jackal-auth-proxy", "health"] || exit 1Consider using
COPY --chown=appuser:appuserwhen copying the binary if you implement a non-root user.If applicable, expose any necessary ports:
EXPOSE 8080If there are any runtime configuration files, consider adding a volume:
VOLUME ["/app/config"]These suggestions will enhance the robustness and flexibility of your Docker image.
.github/workflows/test.yml (2)
16-30: LGTM: Well-structured job, consider adding dependency cachingThe job is well-defined with clear steps using up-to-date action versions. Specifying the Go version ensures reproducibility, and using a Makefile for tests promotes consistency.
To improve performance, consider adding a step to cache Go dependencies. This can significantly speed up subsequent runs.
Here's an example of how you could add caching:
- uses: actions/cache@v3 with: path: | ~/.cache/go-build ~/go/pkg/mod key: ${{ runner.os }}-go-${{ hashFiles('**/go.sum') }} restore-keys: | ${{ runner.os }}-go-Insert this step between the "Setup Go environment" and "Test go project" steps.
1-30: Great foundation for CI, with room for future enhancementsThis workflow file provides a solid foundation for continuous integration of your Go project. It covers essential aspects such as triggering on relevant events, managing concurrency, and running tests in a clean environment.
For future improvements, consider:
- Adding dependency caching to speed up workflow runs.
- Splitting the workflow into multiple jobs if you need to run different types of tests (e.g., unit tests, integration tests).
- Adding code coverage reporting.
- Implementing parallel test execution if the test suite grows large.
These enhancements can be added incrementally as the project evolves and CI needs become more complex.
.github/workflows/build.yml (2)
1-10: LGTM! Consider adding path filters for optimization.The workflow name and triggers are well-defined. The ability to be called by other workflows (
workflow_call) adds flexibility to your CI/CD pipeline. The triggers on push and pull requests to the main branch are appropriate for a build workflow.For optimization, consider adding path filters to avoid unnecessary builds. For example:
on: push: branches: [main] paths: - '**/*.go' - 'go.mod' - 'go.sum' - 'Makefile' pull_request: branches: [main] paths: - '**/*.go' - 'go.mod' - 'go.sum' - 'Makefile'This will only trigger the workflow when Go files, Go module files, or the Makefile are changed.
16-30: Well-structured job with room for optimization.The job definition and steps are logically structured and use up-to-date GitHub Actions. Explicitly setting the Go version (1.22) ensures build reproducibility. Using
make buildmaintains consistency between local and CI environments.To optimize build times, consider adding a step to cache Go modules. Here's an example of how you can implement this:
- name: Cache Go modules uses: actions/cache@v3 with: path: ~/go/pkg/mod key: ${{ runner.os }}-go-${{ hashFiles('**/go.sum') }} restore-keys: | ${{ runner.os }}-go- - name: Build go project run: | make buildAdd this caching step before the "Build go project" step to potentially speed up your builds.
.github/dependabot.yml (2)
14-24: LGTM: gomod ecosystem configuration is well-structured.The configuration for the gomod ecosystem is appropriate:
- Daily updates ensure timely security patches and feature updates.
- The higher limit of 5 open pull requests allows for more concurrent updates.
- Consistent reviewers and assignees across ecosystems maintain proper oversight.
Consider if the higher limit of 5 open pull requests is necessary for your Go modules. If you find that you rarely have this many concurrent updates, you might want to lower this limit to match the other ecosystems.
1-35: Overall, the Dependabot configuration is comprehensive and well-structured.The configuration covers all major aspects of the project (actions, Go modules, and Docker images) with consistent settings across ecosystems. This approach ensures that:
- All parts of the project receive timely updates.
- There's a clear review process with designated reviewers and assignees.
- The number of open pull requests is managed to prevent overwhelming the team.
For future consideration: As the project grows, you might want to explore Dependabot's ability to use YAML anchors and aliases. This could help in reducing repetition in your configuration, especially for common elements like reviewers and assignees. For example:
version: 2 x-common-config: &common-config reviewers: - amimart - ccamel assignees: - amimart - ccamel updates: - package-ecosystem: github-actions directory: / schedule: interval: daily open-pull-requests-limit: 2 <<: *common-config # Similar structure for gomod and dockerThis approach could make the configuration more maintainable as it scales.
internal/version/version.go (1)
8-12: Consider adding comments to explain variable usage.While the variable names are self-explanatory, it would be beneficial to add comments explaining how these variables are intended to be set and used (e.g., at build time). This would improve code maintainability and help future developers understand the purpose of these variables.
Consider adding comments like this:
var ( // Name is the name of the application, to be set at build time. Name = "" // Version is the version of the application, to be set at build time. Version = "" // Commit is the git commit hash of the build, to be set at build time. Commit = "" )internal/version/version_test.go (3)
3-7: Consider avoiding dot import for goconveyWhile dot imports for goconvey are common, they can potentially lead to naming conflicts and reduced code clarity. Consider using a named import instead:
- . "github.com/smartystreets/goconvey/convey" + "github.com/smartystreets/goconvey/convey"Then update the test functions to use
convey.Convey,convey.So, etc. This approach improves code clarity and reduces the risk of naming conflicts.
9-16: LGTM! Consider expanding test coverageThe test for
NewInfo()is well-structured and correctly verifies theGoVersionfield. However, to improve test coverage, consider adding assertions for other fields of theInfostruct, such asName,Version, andGitCommit.Example:
Convey("Then an info object is returned", func() { So(result.GoVersion, ShouldStartWith, "go version") So(result.Name, ShouldNotBeEmpty) So(result.Version, ShouldNotBeEmpty) So(result.GitCommit, ShouldNotBeEmpty) })This ensures that all fields are populated by the
NewInfo()function.🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint
10-10: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
12-12: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
13-13: undefined: So
(typecheck)
13-13: undefined: ShouldStartWith
(typecheck)
18-37: LGTM! Consider adding a test for empty fieldsThe
TestInfoStringfunction is well-structured and thoroughly tests theString()method of theInfostruct. It covers all fields and verifies the expected output format.To further improve the test coverage, consider adding a test case for an
Infostruct with empty fields. This would ensure that theString()method handles such cases gracefully.Example:
Convey("Given an info object with empty fields", func() { emptyInfo := new(Info) Convey("When the object string function is called", func() { result := emptyInfo.String() Convey("Then the result should handle empty fields correctly", func() { expected := `jackal-auth-proxy: git commit: ` So(result, ShouldEqual, expected) }) }) })This additional test case would ensure robustness in handling various input scenarios.
🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint
19-19: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
26-26: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
28-28: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
33-33: undefined: So
(typecheck)
33-33: undefined: ShouldEqual
(typecheck)
scripts/bump-module.sh (5)
1-5: LGTM! Consider adding error handling for the version file.The script setup and version extraction look good. The use of
set -eo pipefailis a good practice for error handling in Bash scripts.Consider adding a check to ensure the 'version' file exists before attempting to read from it. This could prevent unexpected errors if the file is missing. For example:
if [ ! -f version ]; then echo "Error: 'version' file not found" >&2 exit 1 fi major_version=$(cut -d. -f1 < version)
7-11: LGTM! Consider adding error handling for thego mod editcommand.The version check and module name extraction logic look good. The use of
jqfor parsing the JSON output fromgo mod editis appropriate.Consider adding error handling for the
go mod editcommand to ensure it executes successfully. For example:module_name=$(go mod edit -json | jq -r '.Module.Path') || { echo "Error: Failed to extract module name" >&2 exit 1 }
13-14: LGTM! Consider adding error handling for the module update.The command to update the module name in go.mod is correct.
Consider adding error handling for the
go mod editcommand to ensure it executes successfully. For example:if ! go mod edit -module "${module_name_versioned}"; then echo "Error: Failed to update module name in go.mod" >&2 exit 1 fi echo "✅ module name updated to ${module_name_versioned} in go.mod"
16-23: LGTM! Consider adding error handling and improving performance.The source file update logic correctly handles the different
sedsyntax for macOS and other Unix-like systems.Consider the following improvements:
- Add error handling for the
findandsedcommands.- Use
xargsto potentially improve performance for large codebases.Here's an example implementation:
update_files() { local sed_cmd="$1" find . -type f -name "*.go" -print0 | xargs -0 -n 1 sh -c "$sed_cmd" sh || { echo "Error: Failed to update some source files" >&2 return 1 } } if [ "$(uname)" = "Darwin" ]; then update_files 'sed -i "" "s|\"${module_name}|\"${module_name_versioned}|g" "$0"' else update_files 'sed -i "s|\"${module_name}|\"${module_name_versioned}|g" "$0"' fi echo "✅ packages updated to ${module_name_versioned} in source files"This approach uses a function to encapsulate the update logic, adds error handling, and uses
xargsfor potential performance improvements.
25-29: LGTM! Consider adding error handling forgo mod tidy.The cleanup of go.sum and the else condition for when no update is needed are appropriate.
Consider adding error handling for the
go mod tidycommand. For example:echo "🧹 cleaning up go.sum" if ! go mod tidy; then echo "Error: Failed to clean up go.sum" >&2 exit 1 fiThis will ensure that any issues during the cleanup process are caught and reported.
cmd/version.go (1)
35-42: Consider handling invalid output format options explicitly.While the current implementation defaults to YAML for unrecognized output formats, it might be beneficial to explicitly handle invalid options. This could involve returning an error or printing a warning message when an unsupported output format is specified.
Here's a suggested modification:
output, _ := cmd.Flags().GetString(flagOutput) switch strings.ToLower(output) { case "json": bz, err = json.Marshal(verInfo) +case "yaml", "text": + bz, err = yaml.Marshal(&verInfo) default: - bz, err = yaml.Marshal(&verInfo) + return fmt.Errorf("unsupported output format: %s", output) }🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint
41-41: undefined: yaml
(typecheck)
.github/workflows/publish.yml (3)
8-10: LGTM: Concurrency settings are well-configured.The concurrency setup effectively manages multiple workflow runs, preventing simultaneous publishing jobs for the same ref and ensuring only the latest changes are processed. This is a good practice to avoid conflicts and reduce resource usage.
Consider adding a comment explaining the purpose of the concurrency settings for better maintainability. For example:
concurrency: # Ensure only one publish job runs at a time for a given ref group: publish-${{ github.ref }} cancel-in-progress: true
22-40: LGTM: Docker metadata extraction and registry login are well-implemented.The Docker metadata extraction is comprehensive, covering nightly builds and semantic versioning patterns. The vendor label is correctly set. The registry login is secure, using GitHub secrets for credentials. Both actions use recent versions, which is good practice.
Consider adding a comment explaining the purpose of each tag pattern for better maintainability. For example:
tags: | # Nightly build tag type=raw,enable=${{ endsWith(github.ref, github.event.repository.default_branch) }},value=nightly # Semantic versioning tags type=semver,pattern={{version}} type=semver,pattern={{major}}.{{minor}} type=semver,pattern={{major}}
42-49: LGTM: Docker build and publish step is well-configured.The build and publish step is using an up-to-date version of the action and is correctly configured for multi-platform builds (linux/amd64 and linux/arm64). Reusing tags and labels from the metadata step ensures consistency. The push action is correctly set to true for publishing.
Consider adding a cache configuration to speed up subsequent builds. This can be achieved by adding a
cache-fromandcache-toconfiguration to thedocker/build-push-action. For example:- name: Build and publish image(s) uses: docker/build-push-action@v6 with: context: . platforms: linux/amd64,linux/arm64 push: true tags: ${{ steps.docker_metadata.outputs.tags }} labels: ${{ steps.docker_metadata.outputs.labels }} cache-from: type=gha cache-to: type=gha,mode=maxThis uses GitHub Actions cache to store and retrieve Docker layers, potentially reducing build times in future runs.
README.md (4)
5-12: Great addition of informative badges!The new badges provide valuable insights into the project's status, including version, build status, test coverage, and adherence to coding standards. They are well-organized and correctly linked to their respective sources.
Consider adding a short description or legend for the badges, especially for less common ones like "Conventional Commits" and "Semantic Release". This could help newcomers understand their significance.
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[style] ~5-~5: Using many exclamation marks might seem excessive (in this case: 7 exclamation marks for a text that’s 1752 characters long)
Context: ...ne-protocol/jackal-auth-proxy/releases)
[
15-18: Well-defined prerequisites section.The prerequisites are clearly stated and include necessary links for installation. The explanation for Docker's use with the Makefile is helpful for new contributors.
Consider adding the minimum required versions for Golang and Docker to ensure compatibility across different development environments.
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[uncategorized] ~18-~18: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...s://docs.docker.com/engine/install/) as well if you want to use the Makefile. ## Bu...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
20-24: Clear and concise build instructions.The build section provides a simple command to build the project using the Makefile, which is excellent for ease of use.
Consider the following enhancements to make the build section more informative:
- Add a brief explanation of what the build command does.
- Include instructions for running the built application.
- Mention any environment variables or configuration files that might be needed.
Example:
## Build To compile the Jackal auth proxy, run: ```sh make buildThis command will compile the Go code and create an executable in the
./bindirectory.To run the application:
./bin/jackal-auth-proxyNote: Make sure to set up any required environment variables or configuration files before running the application.
--- `1-24`: **Excellent README structure, with room for enhancement.** The updated README provides a comprehensive overview of the Jackal auth proxy project with a logical structure. It covers all essential aspects such as project description, status badges, prerequisites, and build instructions. To further enhance the README, consider adding the following sections: 1. **Usage**: Provide examples of how to use the Jackal auth proxy, including common use cases and configuration options. 2. **Contributing**: Add guidelines for contributors, including how to submit issues, pull requests, and any coding standards to follow. 3. **Testing**: Include instructions on how to run the test suite and any additional testing tools or processes used in the project. 4. **Documentation**: Provide links to more detailed documentation, if available, or explain where users can find additional information about the project. 5. **License**: While the license badge is present, it's good practice to include a dedicated section with a brief description of the license terms. These additions would make the README even more informative and user-friendly, especially for new contributors and users of the Jackal auth proxy. <details> <summary>:toolbox: Tools</summary> <details> <summary>:screwdriver: LanguageTool</summary><blockquote> [style] ~5-~5: Using many exclamation marks might seem excessive (in this case: 7 exclamation marks for a text that’s 1752 characters long) Context: ...ne-protocol/jackal-auth-proxy/releases) [](https://github.com/axone-protocol/jackal-auth-proxy/actions/workflows/lint.yml) [](https://github.com/axone-protocol/jackal-auth-proxy/actions/workflows/build.yml) [](https://github.com/axone-protocol/jackal-auth-proxy/actions/workflows/test.yml) [](https://codecov.io/gh/axone-protocol/jackal-auth-proxy) [](https://conventionalcommits.org) [](https://github.com/semantic-release/semantic-release) [ --- [uncategorized] ~18-~18: Possible missing comma found. Context: ...s://docs.docker.com/engine/install/) as well if you want to use the Makefile. ## Bu... (AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA) </blockquote></details> </details> </blockquote></details> <details> <summary>.github/workflows/release.yml (2)</summary><blockquote> `26-66`: **LGTM: Comprehensive release setup with a suggestion for documentation.** The release job steps and configuration are well-structured: - Repository checkout, GPG key import, Node.js setup, and Docker Buildx configuration are all in place. - The semantic-release-action is used with a specific version, which is good for consistency. - The semantic release configuration includes necessary plugins for changelog generation, execution, and Git operations. Consider adding comments to explain the purpose of each semantic-release plugin for better maintainability. For example: ```yaml extra_plugins: | @semantic-release/changelog # Generates changelog content @semantic-release/exec # Allows execution of shell commands @semantic-release/git # Commits release changes to Git [email protected] # Allows replacing content in files
29-30: LGTM: Good security practices with a suggestion for documentation.The use of secrets and variables for sensitive information and Git configuration is commendable:
secrets.OPS_TOKENis used for repository checkout and asGITHUB_TOKEN.- Git author and committer details are set using variables, allowing for easy configuration.
Consider adding a comment to explain the purpose and required permissions of the
OPS_TOKEN. This will help future maintainers understand why a custom token is used instead of the defaultGITHUB_TOKEN. For example:- name: Check out repository uses: actions/checkout@v4 with: # OPS_TOKEN is used instead of GITHUB_TOKEN for extended permissions # It should have permissions for: XYZ token: ${{ secrets.OPS_TOKEN }}Also applies to: 62-66
.releaserc.yml (4)
1-25: LGTM! Consider adding afeattype for minor releases.The branch configuration and commit-analyzer setup look good. The custom release rules cover various scenarios, which is great for maintaining a clear versioning strategy.
Consider adding a rule for
feattype commits to trigger minor releases:- type: feat release: minorThis aligns with conventional commits standards and ensures new features trigger appropriate version bumps.
31-41: Good version replacement setup. Consider using a more specific regex.The configuration for version replacement is functional and will update the version file correctly.
Consider using a more specific regex pattern to match the version number. This can prevent unintended replacements if the file contains other content. For example:
from: "^v?\\d+\\.\\d+\\.\\d+$"This pattern will match version numbers like
1.2.3orv1.2.3, ensuring only the version number is replaced.
42-47: Good use of exec plugin for module bumping and building.The configuration correctly uses the exec plugin to run necessary scripts during the release process.
Consider adding error handling to these commands. You can use the
failCmdoption to specify a command to run if theprepareCmdfails. For example:- - "@semantic-release/exec" - prepareCmd: | ./scripts/bump-module.sh failCmd: | echo "Failed to bump module version" >&2 exit 1This will provide more informative error messages if something goes wrong during the release process.
48-61: Comprehensive GitHub release asset configuration.The setup for uploading binary assets to GitHub releases is well-structured and covers multiple platforms.
Consider adding checksums for the binary files. This allows users to verify the integrity of the downloaded files. You can add this using the
@semantic-release/execplugin before the GitHub release step:- - "@semantic-release/exec" - prepareCmd: | shasum -a 256 ./target/dist/**/* > checksums.txt - - "@semantic-release/github" - assets: # ... existing assets ... - name: checksums.txt label: SHA256 Checksums path: "./checksums.txt"This will create and upload a file containing SHA256 checksums for all the binary files.
Makefile (4)
1-16: LGTM! Consider using.PHONYfor non-file targets.The constants and variables are well-defined, and the use of color coding for output is a nice touch. The Docker image version for golangci-lint is correctly pinned.
Consider adding a
.PHONYdeclaration at the beginning of the Makefile for targets that don't represent files. This helps Make understand which targets are not files and should always be run. For example:.PHONY: all lint lint-go build build-go help
18-28: LGTM! Consider usinggit describefor more detailed versioning.The flags and build commands are well-defined. Extracting version and commit information and injecting them via LD_FLAGS is a good practice.
Consider using
git describe --tags --always --dirtyinstead of just the commit hash. This provides more detailed version information, especially useful for builds between tags. For example:VERSION := $(shell git describe --tags --always --dirty) COMMIT := $(shell git rev-parse --short HEAD)This change would provide a more informative version string, particularly useful for debugging and support.
38-71: LGTM! Well-structured lint and build targets.The lint and build targets are comprehensive and well-organized. Using Docker for linting ensures consistency, and the build targets allow for flexible compilation across platforms.
Consider adding a
cleantarget to remove build artifacts. This can be useful for ensuring a clean state before builds. For example:.PHONY: clean clean: ## Remove build artifacts @echo "${COLOR_CYAN}🧹 Cleaning build artifacts${COLOR_RESET}" @rm -rf ${TARGET_FOLDER}Don't forget to add
cleanto the.PHONYdeclaration at the beginning of the Makefile.
86-101: LGTM! Informative and user-friendly help target.The help target is well-implemented, providing clear instructions and available commands. The color-coding enhances readability, and including Docker installation instructions is helpful for new contributors.
Consider adding a brief description of the project at the beginning of the help output. This can provide context for new users. For example:
help: ## Show this help. @echo '' @echo '${COLOR_CYAN}jackal-auth-proxy${COLOR_RESET} - A proxy server for authentication and authorization' @echo '' @echo 'Usage:' ....github/workflows/lint.yml (3)
45-85: LGTM! Well-structured Go linting job.The
lint-gojob is well-implemented, efficiently checking for changed Go files before running linters. It uses up-to-date versions of actions and includes both golangci-lint and gofumpt for comprehensive linting.Consider adding a step to cache Go dependencies to speed up future runs:
- uses: actions/cache@v3 with: path: ~/go/pkg/mod key: ${{ runner.os }}-go-${{ hashFiles('**/go.sum') }} restore-keys: | ${{ runner.os }}-go-
86-123: Good addition of CodeQL analysis for Go.The
analyze-gojob is a valuable addition, implementing CodeQL for advanced static analysis. This will help catch potential security issues and bugs.Consider the following improvements:
- Add a condition to skip the analysis if no Go files have changed, similar to the
lint-gojob:if: steps.changed-go-files.outputs.any_changed == 'true'
- The
autobuildstep might not be necessary for Go projects. You could replace it with a simplego buildcommand:- name: Build Go code run: go build ./...These changes will make the workflow more efficient and tailored to Go projects.
Line range hint
1-150: Great improvements to the linting workflow!The additions of
lint-goandanalyze-gojobs significantly enhance the code quality checks for the project, especially for Go code. The workflow now efficiently handles various types of linting and analysis, including Go, Dockerfile, shell scripts, and more.To further optimize the workflow, consider adding a job dependency between
lint-goandanalyze-go. This would ensure that the more time-consuming CodeQL analysis only runs if the basic linting passes:analyze-go: needs: lint-go if: success() # ... rest of the job definitionThis change will help catch basic issues faster and potentially save CI/CD resources.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
go.modis excluded by!**/*.modgo.sumis excluded by!**/*.sum,!**/*.sum
📒 Files selected for processing (21)
- .dockerignore (1 hunks)
- .github/dependabot.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/build.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/lint.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/publish.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/release.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/test.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/thank.yml (1 hunks)
- .gitignore (1 hunks)
- .golangci.yml (1 hunks)
- .releaserc.yml (1 hunks)
- Dockerfile (1 hunks)
- Makefile (1 hunks)
- README.md (1 hunks)
- cmd/root.go (1 hunks)
- cmd/version.go (1 hunks)
- internal/version/version.go (1 hunks)
- internal/version/version_test.go (1 hunks)
- main.go (1 hunks)
- scripts/bump-module.sh (1 hunks)
- version (1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- version
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 actionlint
.github/workflows/release.yml
9-9: error while parsing reusable workflow "./.github/workflows/lint.yml": "workflow_call" event trigger is not found in "on:" at line:4, column:3
(workflow-call)
.github/workflows/thank.yml
27-27: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2046:warning:2:6: Quote this to prevent word splitting
(shellcheck)
🪛 LanguageTool
README.md
[style] ~5-~5: Using many exclamation marks might seem excessive (in this case: 7 exclamation marks for a text that’s 1752 characters long)
Context: ...ne-protocol/jackal-auth-proxy/releases)(EN_EXCESSIVE_EXCLAMATION)
[uncategorized] ~18-~18: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...s://docs.docker.com/engine/install/) as well if you want to use the Makefile. ## Bu...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
🪛 golangci-lint
cmd/version.go
41-41: undefined: yaml
(typecheck)
internal/version/version_test.go
10-10: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
12-12: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
13-13: undefined: So
(typecheck)
13-13: undefined: ShouldStartWith
(typecheck)
19-19: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
26-26: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
28-28: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
33-33: undefined: So
(typecheck)
33-33: undefined: ShouldEqual
(typecheck)
🔇 Additional comments (42)
main.go (1)
3-10: LGTM: Imports are well-organized and relevant.The imports are logically grouped and all imported packages are utilized in the code. The inclusion of the custom
cmdpackage suggests a modular project structure, which is a good practice for maintainability..github/workflows/test.yml (2)
1-10: LGTM: Well-structured workflow triggersThe workflow name is concise and the triggers are well-defined. Including
workflow_callallows for reusability, which is a good practice.
12-14: LGTM: Efficient concurrency configurationThe concurrency settings are well-configured to prevent redundant runs and ensure only the latest code is tested. This approach optimizes resource usage and provides faster feedback.
.github/workflows/build.yml (1)
12-14: Excellent concurrency configuration!The concurrency settings are well-configured. Grouping builds by GitHub ref and cancelling in-progress builds for the same ref is an excellent practice. This ensures that you're always building the latest code and prevents unnecessary resource usage on outdated commits.
cmd/root.go (2)
1-7: LGTM: Package declaration and imports are appropriate.The package name
cmdis suitable for command-related functionality. The imports are relevant and necessary for the implementation.
1-23: Overall, the root command structure is well-implemented.The
cmd/root.gofile provides a solid foundation for the CLI application using the Cobra library. It correctly sets up the root command and provides an execution function. The suggestions made earlier for improving the command description, potentially adding flags or subcommands, and enhancing error logging will further strengthen this foundation.As the application grows, consider:
- Adding subcommands for specific functionalities.
- Implementing global flags for configuration.
- Expanding the root command's
Runfunction if needed for when no subcommand is specified..github/dependabot.yml (2)
3-13: LGTM: github-actions ecosystem configuration is well-structured.The configuration for the github-actions ecosystem is appropriate:
- Daily updates ensure timely security patches and feature updates.
- Limiting open pull requests to 2 prevents overwhelming the team with updates.
- Having both reviewers and assignees ensures proper oversight of changes.
25-35: LGTM: docker ecosystem configuration is well-structured.The configuration for the docker ecosystem is appropriate and consistent with other ecosystems:
- Daily updates ensure timely security patches and feature updates for Docker images.
- Limiting open pull requests to 2 prevents overwhelming the team with updates.
- Consistent reviewers and assignees across ecosystems maintain proper oversight.
internal/version/version.go (3)
1-6: LGTM: Package declaration and imports are appropriate.The package name 'version' accurately reflects its purpose, and the imports are necessary for the functionality provided in this file.
31-37: LGTM: String method is well-implemented.The String method for the Info struct is well-implemented. It correctly formats all the relevant version information in a clear, multi-line format. The use of backticks for the string literal is appropriate for maintaining readability.
1-37: Overall, the version package is well-implemented and serves its purpose effectively.The package provides a clean and extensible way to manage and display version information for the application. The use of a struct with JSON and YAML tags allows for easy serialization, which can be useful for API responses or configuration files.
A few minor suggestions have been made to improve code clarity and maintainability:
- Adding comments to explain the usage of global variables.
- Using a constant for the Go version format string.
These changes would further enhance the already solid implementation.
.github/workflows/thank.yml (4)
1-7: LGTM: Workflow name and triggers are well-defined.The workflow name "Give thanks" is clear and descriptive. The triggers (manual dispatch and push to main branch) are appropriate for the intended purpose of the workflow.
9-11: LGTM: Job setup is appropriate.The job name "give-thanks" is consistent with the workflow name. Using a specific Ubuntu version (22.04) is good for reproducibility and stability.
13-23: LGTM: Repository checkout and dependency change detection are well-implemented.The checkout action uses the latest v4 version, and setting
fetch-depth: 0ensures the entire history is available. The changed-files action is appropriately used to detect changes ingo.mod, which is suitable for tracking dependency changes.
1-32: Overall, the workflow is well-designed and serves its purpose effectively.The "Give thanks" workflow is well-structured and implements a good practice of acknowledging the project's dependencies. It uses appropriate actions and conditions to ensure it runs when needed. With the suggested minor improvement, this workflow will be robust and maintainable.
🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint
27-27: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2046:warning:2:6: Quote this to prevent word splitting
(shellcheck)
internal/version/version_test.go (2)
1-37: Ignore static analysis warnings for goconvey identifiersThe static analysis tool reports undefined identifiers for
Convey,So,ShouldStartWith, andShouldEqual. These warnings are false positives due to the use of goconvey and its dot import. The code is correctly using goconvey's DSL-like syntax.To suppress these warnings, you can add a linter directive at the top of the file:
//nolint:typecheckThis will instruct the linter to ignore typecheck errors for this file. However, be cautious when using such directives as they may hide real issues in the future.
Alternatively, if you choose to use a named import as suggested earlier, these warnings would be resolved automatically.
🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint
10-10: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
12-12: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
13-13: undefined: So
(typecheck)
13-13: undefined: ShouldStartWith
(typecheck)
19-19: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
26-26: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
28-28: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
33-33: undefined: So
(typecheck)
33-33: undefined: ShouldEqual
(typecheck)
1-37: Overall, well-structured and comprehensive testsThe test file for the version package is well-written and covers the main functionality of the
Infostruct and its methods. The use of goconvey provides a clear and readable test structure.To summarize the suggestions for improvement:
- Consider using a named import for goconvey instead of a dot import.
- Expand the
TestNewInfofunction to cover all fields of theInfostruct.- Add a test case in
TestInfoStringfor anInfostruct with empty fields.- Address static analysis warnings, either by using a named import or adding a linter directive.
These enhancements will further improve the robustness and clarity of the tests. Great job on setting up a solid foundation for testing the version package!
🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint
10-10: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
12-12: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
13-13: undefined: So
(typecheck)
13-13: undefined: ShouldStartWith
(typecheck)
19-19: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
26-26: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
28-28: undefined: Convey
(typecheck)
33-33: undefined: So
(typecheck)
33-33: undefined: ShouldEqual
(typecheck)
scripts/bump-module.sh (1)
1-29: Overall, the script is well-implemented with room for minor improvements.The
bump-module.shscript effectively manages Go module versioning, handling the necessary updates in both go.mod and source files. It also correctly addresses the differences insedsyntax between macOS and other Unix-like systems.To further enhance the script's robustness and maintainability, consider implementing the suggested error handling mechanisms and performance optimizations. These improvements will make the script more resilient to potential issues and more efficient for larger codebases.
cmd/version.go (5)
3-11: LGTM: Imports are appropriate and complete.The imports cover all necessary packages for JSON handling, string manipulation, version information, CLI command creation, and YAML processing.
13-16: LGTM: Well-defined constants for flag names.Using constants for flag names is a good practice. It improves maintainability and reduces the risk of typos when referencing these flags elsewhere in the code.
18-51: LGTM: Well-structured version command with appropriate flag handling.The
versionCmdis well-defined using the Cobra library. It correctly handles the--longand--outputflags, providing flexibility in how the version information is displayed. The error handling for JSON/YAML marshaling is appropriately implemented.🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint
41-41: undefined: yaml
(typecheck)
53-58: LGTM: Proper initialization of the version command.The
init()function correctly adds theversionCmdto therootCmdand sets up the necessary flags. This follows the conventions of the Cobra library and ensures that the command is properly integrated into the CLI application.
10-10: Note: False positive in static analysis for yaml package.The static analysis tool reported "undefined: yaml" on line 41. However, this appears to be a false positive as the yaml package is correctly imported on line 10 (
"gopkg.in/yaml.v2"). The usage ofyaml.Marshal()on line 41 is valid and should work as expected.Also applies to: 41-41
.github/workflows/publish.yml (3)
1-6: LGTM: Workflow name and trigger conditions are well-defined.The workflow name "Publish" is clear and descriptive. The trigger conditions are appropriate for a publishing workflow, activating on pushes to the main branch and when version tags are created. This setup allows for automatic publishing of new versions and nightly builds.
13-20: LGTM: Job setup and initial steps are well-configured.The job setup is clear and uses a specific Ubuntu version (22.04) for reproducibility. The initial steps, including repository checkout and Docker Buildx setup, are necessary and use up-to-date action versions. This provides a solid foundation for the subsequent publishing steps.
1-49: Overall, this is a well-crafted publish workflow.The workflow is comprehensive, covering all necessary steps for publishing Docker images with proper versioning and multi-platform support. It demonstrates good practices such as:
- Clear naming and structure
- Appropriate trigger conditions
- Concurrency management
- Secure handling of credentials
- Use of up-to-date action versions
- Comprehensive metadata extraction
The minor suggestions provided (adding comments for clarity and considering build caching) are enhancements to an already solid workflow. This setup provides a strong foundation for automated Docker image publishing.
.golangci.yml (6)
1-2: LGTM: Run configuration looks good.The 10-minute timeout for the linting process is a reasonable default. However, consider monitoring the actual time taken by the linting process in your CI/CD pipeline and adjust this value if necessary for optimal performance.
3-55: Excellent linter configuration.The linter configuration is comprehensive and well-structured. Disabling all linters by default and then explicitly enabling 54 specific linters provides fine-grained control over the linting process. This approach ensures that only desired checks are performed, potentially reducing false positives and improving linting speed.
The enabled linters cover a wide range of checks, including error handling, code simplicity, security, and style. This comprehensive set will help maintain high code quality and catch potential issues early in the development process.
To keep the linting process up-to-date with the latest best practices:
- Periodically review the list of enabled linters and consider adding new ones that become available.
- Stay informed about updates to golangci-lint and the individual linters to leverage new features and improvements.
56-67: Linter-specific settings are well-configured.The settings for individual linters are thoughtfully configured:
- cyclop: Max complexity of 20 and skipping tests is reasonable.
- funlen: 65 statement limit encourages smaller, more focused functions.
- godot: Checking declarations while excluding specific scaffolding lines is practical.
- lll: Line length limit of 135 characters is set.
These settings provide a good balance between strictness and practicality.
Consider reviewing the line length limit of 135 characters. While this may be justified for your project, it's slightly higher than typical limits (often 100-120 characters). If there's no specific reason for this length, you might want to reduce it to improve code readability.
68-70: Output configuration is set to show all issues.The
uniq-by-line: falsesetting allows the linter to report duplicate issues even if they occur on the same line. This can be beneficial for catching multiple issues in complex lines of code.Monitor the linter output in your CI/CD pipeline. If you notice excessive duplicate issues that add noise without providing value, consider changing this setting to
trueor implementing more specific exclusion rules.
71-97: Comprehensive issues configuration with thoughtful exclusions.The issues configuration is well-structured:
- No limit on issues per linter or identical issues ensures all problems are reported.
- Exclusion rules are well-thought-out, ignoring common patterns like go:generate comments and TODO markers.
- Test files have more relaxed linting rules, which is appropriate as test code often has different requirements.
This configuration promotes high code quality while avoiding false positives in specific scenarios.
Monitor the number of reported issues in your CI/CD pipeline. If the volume becomes overwhelming, consider:
- Gradually introducing limits (
max-issues-per-linterandmax-same-issues) to focus on the most critical issues first.- Refining the exclusion rules if you notice patterns of false positives.
This approach will help maintain a balance between thorough linting and manageable output.
1-97: Excellent linting configuration that promotes code quality.This
.golangci.ymlfile provides a comprehensive and well-structured linting configuration for the project. It covers all major aspects of linting, including run settings, enabled linters, linter-specific configurations, output settings, and issues handling.The configuration strikes a good balance between strictness and practicality, setting up a solid foundation for maintaining high code quality. The settings are also flexible enough to be adjusted as the project evolves.
Key strengths of this configuration:
- Wide range of enabled linters (54 in total) covering various aspects of code quality.
- Thoughtful linter-specific settings that adapt to project needs.
- Well-defined exclusion rules to avoid false positives and noise.
- Special considerations for test files, recognizing their unique requirements.
This configuration will significantly contribute to maintaining consistent code quality across the project. As the project grows, continue to review and adjust these settings to ensure they remain optimal for your team's needs.
README.md (1)
1-3: LGTM: Clear and concise project title and description.The updated title and description accurately reflect the purpose of the Jackal auth proxy project. They provide a clear understanding of what the project does and its relationship to Axone.
.github/workflows/release.yml (2)
1-8: LGTM: Workflow trigger and job conditions are well-defined.The manual trigger (
workflow_dispatch) and the conditions for running jobs (only on themainbranch and when triggered bybot-anik) provide good control and security for the release process.
1-66: Overall, the release workflow is well-structured with minor improvements suggested.Summary of findings:
- The workflow trigger and job conditions are well-defined.
- Separate workflow files for lint, build, and test promote modularity, but need verification.
- There's a typo in the main job name that needs correction.
- The release setup is comprehensive, with a suggestion to document plugin purposes.
- Good security practices are in place, with a recommendation to document the
OPS_TOKENusage.These minor adjustments will further improve the already solid release workflow.
🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint
9-9: error while parsing reusable workflow "./.github/workflows/lint.yml": "workflow_call" event trigger is not found in "on:" at line:4, column:3
(workflow-call)
.releaserc.yml (3)
26-30: Excellent setup for release notes and changelog.The configuration for release notes generation and changelog management is well-structured and consistent with the commit-analyzer setup. Using the conventional commits preset ensures uniformity across the release process.
62-69: Well-configured git plugin for post-release commits.The semantic-release/git plugin configuration is comprehensive and includes all necessary files for a Go project. The commit message format is clear and follows conventional commit standards.
The inclusion of
"**/*.go"ensures that any changes to Go source files across the project are committed, which is a good practice for maintaining a clean git history.
1-69: Excellent semantic release configuration for a Go project.The
.releaserc.ymlfile provides a comprehensive setup for automating the release process. It covers all necessary aspects including version management, changelog generation, binary building and publishing, and post-release git operations. The configuration is well-structured and follows best practices for a Go project.Some minor suggestions for improvements have been made in the individual section reviews, but overall, this configuration will serve the project well in maintaining a streamlined and consistent release process.
Makefile (4)
30-36: LGTM! Comprehensive target environment setup.The environment definitions are well-structured and cover major platforms. Using
addprefixto generate target names is an efficient approach.
74-84: LGTM! Comprehensive install and test targets.The install and test targets are well-defined. Including coverage reporting in the test target is excellent for maintaining code quality. The dependency of the test target on the build target ensures that the latest code is always tested.
103-109: LGTM! Well-structured build function.The
build-gofunction is well-defined and allows for flexible cross-compilation. Using a function for this repeated task is an excellent way to reduce code duplication and maintain consistency across different build targets.
1-109: Excellent Makefile structure and implementation.This Makefile is well-crafted, providing a comprehensive set of targets for building, testing, and maintaining the jackal-auth-proxy project. It follows best practices such as using variables for reusability, providing color-coded output for better readability, and including a helpful help target.
Key strengths:
- Clear separation of concerns with well-defined targets
- Cross-platform build support
- Integration of linting and testing
- User-friendly help output
- Use of functions to reduce code duplication
The minor suggestions provided in the review (such as adding a
cleantarget and enhancing version information) can further improve this already solid Makefile.Great job on creating a maintainable and efficient build system!
This PR setup the repository with a minimal CLI application providing version informations.
Details
This brings mainly the DevOps structure before going further in the implementation, it covers the configuration of the CI for lint, build, test, publish (i.e. docker image) and release GitHub Actions Workflows.