fix: optimise CI by running tests only for modified code paths

[abhishekpatil4]

Important

Optimize CI by restricting test runs to specific paths and fix a capitalization issue in documentation.

• CI Optimization:
  • In common.yml, restricts test runs to changes in python/** for both push and pull_request events.
  • In run_examples.yml, restricts test runs to changes in python/** for push events.
  • In run_js_test.yml, restricts test runs to changes in js/** for both push and pull_request events.
• Documentation:
  • Fixes capitalization in autogen.mdx description.

^{This description was created by for a07c85d. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.}

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
composio	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	💬 Add feedback	Dec 4, 2024 10:18am

[ellipsis-dev]

👍 Looks good to me! Reviewed everything up to 43a7cc8 in 11 seconds

More details

• Looked at 47 lines of code in 3 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 3 drafted comments based on config settings.

1. .github/workflows/common.yml:5

• Draft comment:
  Consider using a more inclusive branch name like 'main' instead of 'master', as 'main' is becoming the standard default branch name.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 50%
  The PR optimizes CI by running tests only for modified code paths. The changes in the YAML files are consistent with this intent, as they specify paths for triggering workflows. However, there is a potential issue with the use of 'master' branch, which might not be the default branch in all repositories.

2. .github/workflows/run_examples.yml:6

• Draft comment:
  Consider using a more inclusive branch name like 'main' instead of 'master', as 'main' is becoming the standard default branch name.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 50%
  The PR optimizes CI by running tests only for modified code paths. The changes in the YAML files are consistent with this intent, as they specify paths for triggering workflows. However, there is a potential issue with the use of 'master' branch, which might not be the default branch in all repositories.

3. .github/workflows/run_js_test.yml:6

• Draft comment:
  Consider using a more inclusive branch name like 'main' instead of 'master', as 'main' is becoming the standard default branch name.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 50%
  The PR optimizes CI by running tests only for modified code paths. The changes in the YAML files are consistent with this intent, as they specify paths for triggering workflows. However, there is a potential issue with the use of 'master' branch, which might not be the default branch in all repositories.

Workflow ID: wflow_LBgcep1ZOMoSErIE

---

You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.

[shreysingla11]

Code Review Summary

Overall Assessment

The changes to optimize CI by adding path filters are well-structured and will improve CI efficiency. The implementation is clean and follows GitHub Actions best practices.

Positive Aspects

✅ Good optimization of CI/CD pipelines
✅ Clear separation between Python and JavaScript tests
✅ Will help reduce unnecessary CI runs
✅ Follows good practices for GitHub Actions path filtering

Suggestions for Improvement

1. Add additional path patterns to catch Python files outside the python/ directory
2. Include test files in path filters
3. Consider using paths-ignore for files that don't need testing
4. Consider adding comments in workflow files explaining the path filtering strategy

Code Quality Rating: 8/10

The changes are solid and will improve CI performance. The suggestions above would mainly enhance coverage and maintainability, but the core functionality is well implemented.

[ellipsis-dev]

👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on a07c85d in 22 seconds

More details

• Looked at 13 lines of code in 1 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 drafted comments based on config settings.

1. docs/framework/autogen.mdx:5

• Draft comment:
  The change from 'apps' to 'Apps' is unnecessary and inconsistent with the rest of the document. Consider reverting it to maintain consistency.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable:
  The comment is about a change made in the diff, specifically the capitalization of 'Apps'. The comment suggests reverting the change for consistency, which is a valid concern if the rest of the document uses 'apps'. However, without seeing the rest of the document, it's hard to confirm if this is indeed inconsistent. The comment is actionable as it suggests a specific change.
  I might be missing the context of the rest of the document, which could confirm or refute the claim of inconsistency. The comment assumes that consistency is required without evidence from the rest of the document.
  Given the lack of context, it's safer to assume the comment might be correct about consistency, but without strong evidence, it's hard to be certain.
  The comment is about a change made in the diff and suggests an actionable change for consistency. However, without strong evidence of inconsistency, the comment should be given a moderate grade.

Workflow ID: wflow_B13NRnkp6d5u7pLO

---

You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.