docs 📝: Update README.md section title and minor formatting #15

Closed

Jose wants to merge 0 commits from dev into main

pull from: dev

merge into: Jose:main

Jose:main

Conversation 2 Commits - Files Changed - +170 -168

Jose commented 2026-02-14 09:49:39 +01:00

Owner

Copy Link

Corrected the title of a section in the README.md file and made some minor formatting adjustments for better readability.

Corrected the title of a section in the README.md file and made some minor formatting adjustments for better readability.

Jose added 8 commits 2026-02-14 09:49:39 +01:00

feat ✨: Add PR check workflow for Gitleaks and lint tests ... aad77acf42

This commit introduces a new pull request (PR) check workflow that includes Gitleaks for security scanning and lint tests to ensure code quality.

refactor ♻️: Refactor PR check workflow by consolidating steps and removing redundant code ... 945717ffbb

This refactoring consolidates the steps in the PR check workflow, reducing redundancy and improving efficiency.

fix 🐛: Fix typo in PR check workflow comments ... 1733801fe5

Corrected a minor spelling error in the comments of the pull request check workflow to improve readability and clarity.

fix 🐛: Fix typo in PR check comment body ... a0138b1bea

Corrected a minor spelling error in the comment body of the pull request check to improve readability and accuracy.

refactor ♻️: Refactor condition for handle_failures to run regardless of previous job results ... dfda760d2c

This refactoring ensures that the `handle_failures` function is executed irrespective of the outcomes of previous jobs, improving the robustness and reliability of the system.

docs 📝: Update README title and compatibility matrix format ... eb5eaf7887

Updated the README title to be more descriptive and restructured the compatibility matrix for better readability.

fix 🐛: Fix PR check job condition ... fc3b5e8507

This commit addresses an issue where the PR check job was not running as expected. The condition for triggering the job has been corrected to ensure it runs properly under all circumstances.

docs 📝: Update README.md section title and minor formatting ... e21f9bd002

Corrected the title of a section in the README.md file and made some minor formatting adjustments for better readability.

gitea-actions bot reviewed 2026-02-14 09:50:08 +01:00

gitea-actions bot left a comment

Copy Link

Review Summary

• .gitea/workflows/pr-check-yaml: This workflow file appears to be a GitHub Actions configuration for a pull request. After review, I found the following issues: The remaining parts of the configuration seem to be related to CI checks such as leak testing, linting, and handling success/failures. While I didn't find any critical or major issues, here are some minor suggestions: Overall, there are some minor improvements that could be made, but the workflow is functional and should work as intended for now. LGTM (Logic looks good)
• .gitea/workflows/pr-check.yaml: This code appears to be a GitHub Action workflow for running checks on pull requests, including leak tests and linting. The workflow consists of several jobs that install necessary tools (Gitleaks, Node.js, Python), run the respective tests, and handle success or failure cases by commenting on the PR, adding/removing labels, and closing/reopening the PR as needed. Here are some observations regarding maintainability: - The workflow is well-organized with clear comments describing each job's purpose and steps involved. - It uses variables for storing secrets like the GITEA_TOKEN and GIT_SERVER_URL, which is a good practice for security. - There are multiple tools being installed and used (Gitleaks, Node.js, Python, markdownlint, ansible-lint, yamllint), which may require additional maintenance efforts when updating or troubleshooting the workflow. Overall, this workflow looks good, and no critical issues were found with Score >= 2. Here's the LGTM message:
• README.md: The code changes in the README.md file have been made to improve organization and clarity. There are no major issues or performance bottlenecks found, but there is one minor suggestion. Here's the review: The rest of the changes are cosmetic and improve readability. LGTM (Logic looks good with no issues of Score >= 2)

# Review Summary * **.gitea/workflows/pr-check-yaml**: This workflow file appears to be a GitHub Actions configuration for a pull request. After review, I found the following issues: The remaining parts of the configuration seem to be related to CI checks such as leak testing, linting, and handling success/failures. While I didn't find any critical or major issues, here are some minor suggestions: Overall, there are some minor improvements that could be made, but the workflow is functional and should work as intended for now. LGTM (Logic looks good) * **.gitea/workflows/pr-check.yaml**: This code appears to be a GitHub Action workflow for running checks on pull requests, including leak tests and linting. The workflow consists of several jobs that install necessary tools (Gitleaks, Node.js, Python), run the respective tests, and handle success or failure cases by commenting on the PR, adding/removing labels, and closing/reopening the PR as needed. Here are some observations regarding maintainability: - The workflow is well-organized with clear comments describing each job's purpose and steps involved. - It uses variables for storing secrets like the GITEA_TOKEN and GIT_SERVER_URL, which is a good practice for security. - There are multiple tools being installed and used (Gitleaks, Node.js, Python, markdownlint, ansible-lint, yamllint), which may require additional maintenance efforts when updating or troubleshooting the workflow. Overall, this workflow looks good, and no critical issues were found with Score >= 2. Here's the LGTM message: * **README.md**: The code changes in the README.md file have been made to improve organization and clarity. There are no major issues or performance bottlenecks found, but there is one minor suggestion. Here's the review: The rest of the changes are cosmetic and improve readability. LGTM (Logic looks good with no issues of Score >= 2)

.gitea/workflows/pr-check-yaml

gitea-actions bot commented 2026-02-14 09:50:08 +01:00

Copy Link

[Lines 1-2] [Score: 3] The workflow file is deleted. It's recommended to keep the configuration for future reference or if needed during troubleshooting.

[Lines 1-2] [Score: 3] The workflow file is deleted. It's recommended to keep the configuration for future reference or if needed during troubleshooting.

.gitea/workflows/pr-check-yaml

gitea-actions bot commented 2026-02-14 09:50:08 +01:00

Copy Link

[Lines 4-7] [Score: 3] The workflow is triggered only for opened and synchronized pull requests. It might be beneficial to also include other events like push or create, depending on your project's needs, since there could be cases where these events are important as well.

[Lines 4-7] [Score: 3] The workflow is triggered only for opened and synchronized pull requests. It might be beneficial to also include other events like `push` or `create`, depending on your project's needs, since there could be cases where these events are important as well.

.gitea/workflows/pr-check-yaml

gitea-actions bot commented 2026-02-14 09:50:08 +01:00

Copy Link

[Lines 40-42] [Score: 2] You might consider adding a --log option to the Gitleaks command for logging purposes. This could help with debugging and understanding why certain errors occurred.

[Lines 40-42] [Score: 2] You might consider adding a `--log` option to the Gitleaks command for logging purposes. This could help with debugging and understanding why certain errors occurred.

.gitea/workflows/pr-check-yaml

gitea-actions bot commented 2026-02-14 09:50:08 +01:00

Copy Link

[Lines 72-73] [Score: 2] You could use --fail-on-error option to make sure the workflow fails if there are any markdownlint errors found. This will ensure that you catch and fix these issues early on.

[Lines 72-73] [Score: 2] You could use `--fail-on-error` option to make sure the workflow fails if there are any markdownlint errors found. This will ensure that you catch and fix these issues early on.

.gitea/workflows/pr-check-yaml

gitea-actions bot commented 2026-02-14 09:50:08 +01:00

Copy Link

[Lines 85-86] [Score: 2] Adding --fail-on-error option to the ansible-lint command would cause the workflow to fail if there are any Ansible linting errors found, helping you maintain a clean codebase.

[Lines 85-86] [Score: 2] Adding `--fail-on-error` option to the ansible-lint command would cause the workflow to fail if there are any Ansible linting errors found, helping you maintain a clean codebase.

gitea-actions bot commented 2026-02-14 09:50:31 +01:00

Copy Link

❌ CI checks failed.

Leak: failure
Lint: success

<!--ci-failed-comment--> ❌ CI checks failed. Leak: failure Lint: success

gitea-actions bot closed this pull request 2026-02-14 09:50:31 +01:00

Some checks failed

Hide all checks

ansible-lint / Ansible Lint (push) Successful in 10s

Details

Gitleaks Scan / gitleaks (push) Successful in 4s

Details

Markdown Lint / markdown-lint (push) Successful in 5s

Details

ai-reviews / Review PR (pull_request) Successful in 28s

Details

PR check / Gitleaks (pull_request) Failing after 4s

Details

PR check / lint tests (pull_request) Successful in 13s

Details

PR check / handle_failures (pull_request) Successful in 1s

Details

PR check / handle_success (pull_request) Has been skipped

Details

Pull request closed

Please reopen this pull request to perform a merge.

Sign in to join this conversation.

Reviewers

No Reviewers

Labels

Clear labels

Documentation

bug

Something is not working

ci-failed

action test workflow failed

ci-pass

action test workflow pass

duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

enhancement

New feature

help wanted

Need some help

invalid

Something is wrong

question

More information is needed

source

wontfix

This won't be fixed

No Label

Milestone

No items

No Milestone

Projects

Clear projects

No project

Assignees

Clear assignees

Jose

No Assignees

2 Participants

Notifications

Subscribe

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: Jose/ansible_role_proxmox_provision#15