Repository navigation
Conversation
|
Important
This repository does not receive automatic reviews because it has fewer than 10 stars. ⚙️ Run configuration
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. Comment |
![claude[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1236702?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
|
|
||
| ## Your own | ||
|
|
||
| Copy these three files into your repository, your profile repository included: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This promises that copying the three files gives you a working guest book, but .github/workflows/guestbook.yml still hardcodes this repository:
- Line 81 links the thank-you comment to
https://github.com/0-draft/guestbook#guestbook. Every visitor to a copy is sent to this repo's book instead of theirs. This is the same problem the PR fixes inscripts/update_guestbook.py. - Lines 34, 52 and 53 hardcode
main. A copy whose default branch ismasterfails at checkout.
Either use ${{ github.repository }} and ${{ github.event.repository.default_branch }} in the workflow, or list these as things to change here. As written, the "Your own" section outruns the code.
|
One finding: the new "Your own" section says copying three files is enough, but guestbook.yml still hardcodes |
|
No findings: the default-branch and repository changes are consistent across the workflow, script and README, and the new values reach the shell only through env vars. |
The script linked every entry to 0-draft/guestbook, so a copy elsewhere would link its visitors' messages to issues here. It now takes the repository from GITHUB_REPOSITORY, which Actions sets.
The README gets a short section on which three files to copy and where the markers go. Checked by running the script against a README that has only the two markers: it builds the table and links the entry to the given repository.