Update GitHub Action Versions

[Jamie-BitFlight]

GitHub Actions Version Updates

• davelosert/vitest-coverage-report-action published a new release v2.8.3 on 2025-05-19T05:02:37Z
• pozil/auto-assign-issue published a new release v2.2.0 on 2025-02-04T09:57:00Z
• actions/checkout published a new release v4.2.2 on 2024-10-23T14:46:00Z
• xt0rted/markdownlint-problem-matcher published a new release v3.0.0 on 2024-02-24T23:41:19Z
• reviewdog/action-eslint published a new release v1.33.2 on 2025-03-18T07:08:17Z

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Updated several GitHub Actions workflows to use newer versions of actions for improved reliability and security. This includes upgrades for code checkout, linting, issue assignment, and test coverage reporting actions. No changes were made to workflow logic or user-facing features.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

Several GitHub Actions workflow files were updated to use newer versions of their respective actions. No changes were made to workflow logic, conditions, or control flow. The updates focused solely on specifying more recent versions for actions such as checkout, auto-assign, markdown linting, eslint review, and coverage reporting.

Changes

File(s)	Change Summary
.github/workflows/assign.yml	Updated pozil/auto-assign-issue action from v1.13.0 to v2.2.0.
.github/workflows/deploy.yml	Updated actions/checkout from v4.1.1 to v4.2.2.
.github/workflows/github_actions_version_updater.yml	Updated actions/checkout from v4 to v4.2.2.
.github/workflows/push_code_linting.yml	Updated actions/checkout (v4.1.1 → v4.2.2), xt0rted/markdownlint-problem-matcher (v2 → v3.0.0), and reviewdog/action-eslint (v1.20.0 → v1.33.2).
.github/workflows/test.yml	Updated actions/checkout (v4.1.1 → v4.2.2) and davelosert/vitest-coverage-report-action (v2 → v2.8.3).

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate Unit Tests

• Create PR with Unit Tests
• Post Copyable Unit Tests in a Comment
• Commit Unit Tests in branch gh-actions-update-1751764214

---

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

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Explain this complex logic.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai explain this code block.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

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)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
• @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
• @coderabbitai auto-generate unit tests to generate unit tests for this PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[github-actions]

Coverage Report

Status	Category	Percentage	Covered / Total
🔵	Lines	72.11%	2092 / 2901
🔵	Statements	72.11%	2092 / 2901
🔵	Functions	76.13%	67 / 88
🔵	Branches	82.96%	190 / 229

File Coverage

No changed files found.

Generated in workflow #144 for commit 0f1be49 by the Vitest Coverage Report Action

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (5)

.github/workflows/github_actions_version_updater.yml (1)

14-14: Pin the action to a commit SHA to mitigate supply-chain risk

Using a mutable tag (v4.2.2) still allows silent force-pushes. Consider pinning to the full commit digest recommended in GitHub’s hardening guide:

-      - uses: actions/[email protected]
+      - uses: actions/[email protected] # 9b9e2b9e3b9e2b... (example SHA)

.github/workflows/deploy.yml (1)

55-55: Same hardening advice as above for actions/checkout

Consistently pinning across workflows avoids one file lagging behind.

.github/workflows/test.yml (1)

34-34: Checkout version update – also consider SHA pinning

See earlier comment; consistency across workflows matters.

.github/workflows/push_code_linting.yml (2)

35-35: Pin actions/checkout to SHA for consistency

Same recommendation as other files.

---

35-44: YAML lint: trailing spaces detected (line 40)

YAMLlint flagged trailing whitespace; trimming avoids noisy diffs later.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f822bc2 and 0f1be49.

📒 Files selected for processing (5)

• .github/workflows/assign.yml (1 hunks)
• .github/workflows/deploy.yml (1 hunks)
• .github/workflows/github_actions_version_updater.yml (1 hunks)
• .github/workflows/push_code_linting.yml (1 hunks)
• .github/workflows/test.yml (2 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

🪛 YAMLlint (1.37.1)

.github/workflows/push_code_linting.yml

[error] 40-40: trailing spaces

(trailing-spaces)

🔇 Additional comments (4)

.github/workflows/assign.yml (1)

9-9: Major-version bump: verify that v2 input names/behaviour match your current config

pozil/auto-assign-issue jumped from v1.x to v2.2.0, which introduced a few breaking-change defaults (e.g. renamed numOfAssignee → numOfAssignees). Double-check that none of your relied-upon inputs/outputs were removed or renamed.

.github/workflows/test.yml (1)

54-54: Upgrade to [email protected]: confirm output paths

v2.6+ defaults to looking for coverage/.vitest/*. Your inputs still point to ./out/coverage-*.json; verify that the action resolves these paths or update the config.

.github/workflows/push_code_linting.yml (2)

43-43: markdownlint-problem-matcher v3 requires Node 20 runner

Ubuntu-latest now defaults to Node 22; ensure the action still functions or pin the runner version.

---

47-47: reviewdog/action-eslint 1.33.x deprecates eslint_flags

New flag is eslint_flags_input; verify you’re not hitting a deprecation warning.