Repository navigation
Conversation
…3930) ## Summary CodeRabbit's rate-limit reply now puts definition-list and break markup between its `</summary>` and the sentence `Review rate limited.`. The second `rate_limit` pattern in `scripts/reviewers/coderabbit.json` allowed only whitespace there, so it never matched. `rate_limited_by` then read no limit, `other_rate_limited` stayed empty, and `limited_since` never cleared the pending CodeRabbit check. That check held `wait` to its timeout (exit 30) and `merge` at `CHECKS_PENDING`. The pattern now tolerates whitespace and bare `dl`, `dd`, `dt`, `br`, `p` tags between the summary and the sentence. It still needs the reply marker, the `Action not completed` summary, and the sentence directly after the markup, so ordinary comments do not match. ## Root cause The pattern was the whole story. Both `wait` (`held_checks_open`) and `merge` (`items`) already route through `hosted_reviews_running`, which already releases a reviewer whose newest output is a rate limit posted since its check began. No second code path needed a change, so the maintainer's decision to hold neither on a rate-limited CodeRabbit is met by the reader fix alone. The digest still reports the limit as `other_rate_limited`. ## Tests A fixture of the new reply shape, with a placeholder invocation hash, joins the existing two. Tests cover the reader, `wait` (exit 0, `other_rate_limited` still printed) and the merge gate's unmet items, plus a near miss with text before the sentence. ## Notes - `scripts/README.md` states that only CodeRabbit's limit is read and which tags the reply may carry. - `merge`'s informational `pending=` line on a refusal still names any unfinished check, rate limited or not. It decides nothing. Refs #3928 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> <!-- coderabbit-ai-generated:v1 --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit * **Bug Fixes** * CodeRabbit rate-limit replies with supported HTML formatting are now recognized correctly. * Older rate-limit comments no longer clear a pending review check; only replies posted after the check began are considered. * Rate-limited hosted reviews no longer keep a wait pending, and the status digest reports the rate limit. * **Documentation** * Clarified how CodeRabbit rate-limit replies affect pending checks. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
Warning Review limit reachedYou've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository. Next included review available in 30 minutes. View limit details
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. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟢 Approval recommended
No active review issues are identified, and the changes include targeted test coverage for formatted rate-limit replies across reading, waiting, reporting, and merge-gate behavior.
No open issues 🎉
What changed in this PR
This pull request promotes the CodeRabbit rate-limit handling fix from Develop to main. It recognizes formatted rate-limit replies so pending review and merge checks are released correctly while preserving digest reporting.
Changes:
- Accepts supported bare HTML tags around CodeRabbit’s rate-limit sentence.
- Adds reader, wait, and merge coverage for formatted replies and near misses.
- Documents the supported reply markup and rate-limit behavior.
- Notes a minor documentation consistency nit regarding the carried review contract.
| File | Summary |
|---|---|
tests/test_pr_review.py |
Tests formatted CodeRabbit replies, reader behavior, wait handling, and reporting. |
tests/test_pr_merge.py |
Verifies formatted rate-limit replies do not hold the merge gate. |
scripts/reviewers/coderabbit.json |
Expands the rate-limit pattern to accept supported markup. |
scripts/README.md |
Documents rate-limit handling and accepted reply tags. |
This pull request is ready to be approved.
Review effort: Lite
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3931 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 78.26% 78.26%
=======================================
Files 35 35
Lines 12328 12328
=======================================
Hits 9648 9648
Misses 2680 2680
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
@coderabbitai review |
|
/review |
Action not completed
|
Summary
Promotes #3930 to
main.pr_review.py waitormerge(Read CodeRabbit's Rate-Limit Reply With Markup Around Its Sentence #3930). CodeRabbit's command reply now wrapsReview rate limited.in definition-list and break markup, which the vocabulary pattern inscripts/reviewers/coderabbit.jsondid not tolerate. The reader returned no limit, so the pending CodeRabbit check heldwaitto its timeout andmergeatCHECKS_PENDING. The pattern now accepts whitespace and baredl,dd,dt,br,ptags before the sentence, and both paths release through the existing rate-limit rule. The digest still reportsother_rate_limited.Closes #3928
🤖 Generated with Claude Code