Skip to content

Conversation

@tisnik
Copy link
Contributor

@tisnik tisnik commented Sep 24, 2025

Description

Updated .gitignore file

Type of change

  • Refactor
  • New feature
  • Bug fix
  • CVE fix
  • Optimization
  • Documentation Update
  • Configuration Update
  • Bump-up service version
  • Bump-up dependent library
  • Bump-up library or tool used for development (does not change the final image)
  • CI configuration change
  • Konflux configuration change
  • Unit tests improvement
  • Integration tests improvement
  • End to end tests improvement

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Updated version control ignore rules to exclude local SQLite database files, reducing the risk of committing environment-specific data and keeping the repository cleaner.
    • Added a clarifying comment describing the database file ignore pattern to aid maintainability.
    • No user-facing functionality or UI changes; this improves developer workflows and streamlines reviews.

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 24, 2025

Walkthrough

Added a new ignore pattern for SQLite database files in .gitignore, preceded by a comment labeling the section for database files.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary of edits
Git ignore updates
\.gitignore
Inserted a "Database files" comment and added the *.sqlite pattern to ignore SQLite database files.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Poem

I twitch my nose at files we shouldn’t keep,
SQLite crumbs where backups sleep.
Into the burrow, ignore they go—
.git stays tidy, neat in its flow.
Hippity-hop, with a light-foot leap,
Our repo’s garden is clean and deep. 🐇✨

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title Check ✅ Passed The title "Updated .gitignore file" directly describes the primary change—modifying .gitignore to add database ignore rules—and is concise and clear; it accurately reflects the changeset though it could be marginally more specific (e.g., mention ignoring SQLite files).
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changes. Docstring coverage check skipped.
✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment

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

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
.gitignore (1)

188-190: Also ignore WAL/SHM/journal and common DB extensions.

Covers SQLite’s sidecar files and common variants.

Apply:

 # Database files
-*.sqlite
+*.sqlite
+*.sqlite3
+*.db
+*.sqlite-shm
+*.sqlite-wal
+*.sqlite-journal
+*.db-shm
+*.db-wal
+*-journal

Optional: consider removing earlier specific entries (db.sqlite3, db.sqlite3-journal) to avoid duplication.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0edd764 and 9fed698.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .gitignore (1 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (2)
  • GitHub Check: build-pr
  • GitHub Check: e2e_tests
🔇 Additional comments (1)
.gitignore (1)

188-190: LGTM — ignoring SQLite artifacts is a good safeguard

Nice addition; prevents accidental commits of local DBs. Re-run locally to confirm no SQLite/.db files are already tracked (previous check returned no output):

git ls-files | rg -nP '\.(sqlite3?|db)$|-(wal|shm|journal)$'

@tisnik tisnik merged commit fc7cbe1 into lightspeed-core:main Sep 24, 2025
18 of 19 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant