Ossf/gha scorecard #105
Ossf/gha scorecard #105
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces modifications to the CI/CD pipeline configurations in two workflow files and updates the README.md. The changes include refining trigger conditions for pull requests to explicitly target the Changes
Possibly related PRs
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 (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
.github/workflows/delayed-pipelines.yml (1)
Line range hint
67-82: Consider enhancing project selection robustness.While the conditional logic for project selection works, consider these improvements for better maintainability and reliability:
- Validate project existence before build
- Consider using a configuration file for project lists instead of hard-coding
- Add error handling for missing projects
Here's a suggested improvement:
if [ "${{ matrix.framework }}" == "netstandard2.0" ]; then projects=( "src/**/Cuemon.Extensions.Globalization.csproj" ) - echo "result=$(IFS=' '; echo "${projects[*]}")" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT + # Validate projects exist + for pattern in "${projects[@]}"; do + if ! compgen -G "$pattern" > /dev/null; then + echo "::error::No projects found matching pattern: $pattern" + exit 1 + fi + done + # Use found projects + found_projects=$(find src -name "*.csproj" -type f | grep -E "$(IFS='|'; echo "${projects[*]}")") + echo "result=$found_projects" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT else projects=( "src/**/Cuemon.Core.App.csproj" "src/**/Cuemon.Extensions.Globalization.csproj" ) - echo "result=$(IFS=' '; echo "${projects[*]}")" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT + # Apply same validation and finding logic as above.github/workflows/pipelines.yml (1)
4-9: LGTM! Consider additional security hardening.The changes improve the workflow configuration by:
- Explicitly targeting the main branch for pull requests
- Using standard glob syntax for markdown file exclusions
Consider these additional security hardening measures:
- Add
permissionsblock to explicitly define required GitHub token permissions- Consider adding
pull_request_targetevent if you need to handle PRs from forks securelyAdd a permissions block at the workflow level:
name: Cuemon CI/CD Pipeline on: pull_request: branches: [main] paths-ignore: - .codecov/** - .docfx/** - .nuget/** - '**/*.md' workflow_dispatch: inputs: configuration: type: choice description: The build configuration to use in the deploy stage. required: true default: Release options: - Debug - Release + permissions: + contents: read + pull-requests: write + checks: writeREADME.md (2)
Line range hint
16-24: Consider adding migration guide for CI/CD transition.While the transition from Azure DevOps to GitHub Actions is clearly stated, it would be helpful to add a brief migration guide or link to one for users who need to update their workflows.
Add a section like this:
All CI and CD integrations have been migrated away from [Microsoft Azure DevOps](https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/devops/) and now embraces GitHub Actions based on the [Codebelt](https://github.com/codebeltnet) umbrella. + +> [!NOTE] +> If you're migrating from Azure DevOps pipelines, please refer to our [migration guide](docs/migration-guide.md) for detailed steps and best practices.🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[grammar] ~23-~23: The verb form ‘are’ does not appear to fit in this context.
Context: ...odebeltnet) umbrella. All code quality analysis are done by [SonarCloud](https://sonarcloud...(SINGULAR_NOUN_VERB_AGREEMENT)
Line range hint
27-35: Consider adding transition timeline for branching strategy change.While the move to trunk-based development is well-explained, adding a timeline for the transition would help users better prepare for the change.
Add a transition timeline like this:
> [!NOTE] > `main` branch will be a clean slate starting from v8.3.1, meaning no previous commits will be preserved. Previous bad practices is a result of this, and going forward we will use Squash or Rebase before committing new code. + +### Transition Timeline +- December 2024: Begin transition to trunk-based development +- January 2025: Complete migration to `main` branch +- February 2025: Archive legacy branches🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[grammar] ~23-~23: The verb form ‘are’ does not appear to fit in this context.
Context: ...odebeltnet) umbrella. All code quality analysis are done by [SonarCloud](https://sonarcloud...(SINGULAR_NOUN_VERB_AGREEMENT)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
.github/workflows/delayed-pipelines.yml(1 hunks).github/workflows/pipelines.yml(1 hunks)README.md(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (5)
.github/workflows/delayed-pipelines.yml (2)
4-4: LGTM! Workflow trigger configuration looks good.
The changes improve the workflow configuration by:
- Explicitly targeting the
mainbranch for pull requests, which is a security best practice - Using a more standard glob pattern for markdown files
Also applies to: 9-9
Line range hint 1-146: Verify workflow security and environment configuration.
The workflow uses secrets and environments. Please verify:
- Environment protection rules are configured for 'Production'
- Required reviewers are set for environment deployments
- Branch protection rules align with the workflow configuration
README.md (3)
Line range hint 11-15: LGTM! Clear deprecation notice and version support information.
The deprecation notice for older .NET versions and the important note about version 8.3.1 being the last to support .NET 7 are well-documented and prominently displayed.
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[grammar] ~23-~23: The verb form ‘are’ does not appear to fit in this context.
Context: ...odebeltnet) umbrella. All code quality analysis are done by [SonarCloud](https://sonarcloud...
(SINGULAR_NOUN_VERB_AGREEMENT)
25-25: LGTM! Security badge addition enhances project credibility.
The OpenSSF Scorecard badge addition is a valuable addition that provides transparency about the project's security posture.
Line range hint 37-38: Verify semantic versioning implementation.
While the commitment to semantic versioning is stated, we should verify its implementation in the codebase.
✅ Verification successful
Semantic versioning is correctly implemented and follows the documented approach
The git tags in the repository demonstrate proper semantic versioning implementation, including:
- Release versions (e.g. v9.0.0, v8.3.2, v8.3.1)
- Pre-release versions with both preview and rc suffixes (e.g. v9.0.0-rc.1, v9.0.0-preview.12)
The versioning pattern strictly follows semver format: MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH[-PRERELEASE]
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if version numbers in the codebase follow semantic versioning
# Check version numbers in csproj files
fd -e csproj -x grep -H '<Version>' {}
# Check version patterns in GitHub tags
gh api repos/gimlichael/Cuemon/tags --paginate | jq -r '.[].name' | grep -E '^v[0-9]+\.[0-9]+\.[0-9]+(-[0-9A-Za-z-]+(\.[0-9A-Za-z-]+)*)?$'
Length of output: 423
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[grammar] ~23-~23: The verb form ‘are’ does not appear to fit in this context.
Context: ...odebeltnet) umbrella. All code quality analysis are done by [SonarCloud](https://sonarcloud...
(SINGULAR_NOUN_VERB_AGREEMENT)
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #105 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 80.02% 80.09% +0.07%
==========================================
Files 598 598
Lines 18502 18502
Branches 1886 1886
==========================================
+ Hits 14806 14820 +14
+ Misses 3628 3614 -14
Partials 68 68 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
This pull request includes updates to the CI/CD pipeline configurations and the README file to enhance project documentation and build processes. The most important changes include the addition of branch specifications for workflows, updating file path patterns for ignored paths, and adding a new badge to the README.
Updates to CI/CD pipeline configurations:
.github/workflows/delayed-pipelines.yml: Addedbranches: [main]to thepull_requesttrigger and updated the file path pattern for Markdown files to**/*.md..github/workflows/pipelines.yml: Addedbranches: [main]to thepull_requesttrigger and updated the file path pattern for Markdown files to**/*.md.Enhancements to project documentation:
README.md: Added the OpenSSF Scorecard badge to the list of badges to improve visibility of project security metrics.Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation
Chores