Update azure-pipelines-1.yml for Azure Pipelines #1
Conversation
|
This is a benchmark review for experiment This pull request was cloned from Experiment configurationreview_config:
# User configuration for the review
# - benchmark - use the user config from the benchmark reviews
# - <value> - use the value directly
user_config:
enable_ai_review: true
enable_rule_comments: false
enable_complexity_comments: benchmark
enable_docstring_comments: benchmark
enable_security_comments: benchmark
enable_tests_comments: benchmark
enable_comment_suggestions: benchmark
enable_functionality_review: benchmark
enable_approvals: true
ai_review_config:
# The model responses to use for the experiment
# - benchmark - use the model responses from the benchmark reviews
# - llm - call the language model to generate responses
model_responses:
comments_model: benchmark
comment_validation_model: benchmark
comment_suggestion_model: benchmark
complexity_model: benchmark
docstrings_model: benchmark
functionality_model: benchmark
security_model: benchmark
tests_model: benchmark
# The pull request dataset to run the experiment on
pull_request_dataset:
- https://github.com/strawberry-graphql/strawberry/pull/3478
- https://github.com/agatma/sprint1-http-server/pull/3
- https://github.com/strawberry-graphql/strawberry-django/pull/525
- https://github.com/agatma/sprint1-http-server/pull/4
- https://github.com/strawberry-graphql/strawberry/pull/3480
- https://github.com/Xmaster6y/mulsi/pull/21
- https://github.com/Xmaster6y/mulsi/pull/22
- https://github.com/LLotme/vscode/pull/4
- https://github.com/ignition-api/8.1/pull/271
- https://github.com/ignition-api/8.1/pull/272
- https://github.com/manoelhc/test-actions/pull/33
- https://github.com/tqt97/BlogForJob/pull/3
- https://github.com/tqt97/BlogForJob/pull/2
- https://github.com/tqt97/BlogForJob/pull/4
- https://github.com/ser3n7ty/Nvim/pull/1
- https://github.com/ser3n7ty/Nvim/pull/2
- https://github.com/ser3n7ty/Nvim/pull/3
- https://github.com/okisdev/ChatChat/pull/325
- https://github.com/DevCycleHQ/ios-client-sdk/pull/197
- https://github.com/DevCycleHQ/test-harness/pull/424
- https://github.com/DevCycleHQ/flutter-client-sdk/pull/150
- https://github.com/DevCycleHQ/cli/pull/382
- https://github.com/DevCycleHQ/devcycle-docs/pull/642
- https://github.com/uncscode/particula/pull/449
- https://github.com/nikhilbadyal/docker-py-revanced/pull/518
- https://github.com/ignition-incendium/incendium/pull/199
- https://github.com/rtk-rnjn/algorithms/pull/81
- https://github.com/rtk-rnjn/algorithms/pull/82
- https://github.com/rtk-rnjn/algorithms/pull/83
- https://github.com/rtk-rnjn/algorithms/pull/84
- https://github.com/suttacentral/suttacentral/pull/3151
- https://github.com/EduardSchwarzkopf/pecuny/pull/131
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/cspdk/pull/27
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/cspdk/pull/28
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/cspdk/pull/29
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/ubc/pull/376
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/ubc/pull/377
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/gdsfactory/pull/2709
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/ubc/pull/378
- https://github.com/W-zrd/unishare_mobile/pull/13
- https://github.com/Nuitka/Nuitka/pull/2830
- https://github.com/jquagga/ttt/pull/98
- https://github.com/jquagga/ttt/pull/101
- https://github.com/Idrinth/api-bench/pull/939
- https://github.com/letsdoitnowus/planium-backend/pull/41
- https://github.com/albumentations-team/albumentations.ai/pull/74
- https://github.com/albumentations-team/albumentations/pull/1695
- https://github.com/yashasvi-jain/ucron-models/pull/11
- https://github.com/nbhirud/system_update/pull/24
- https://github.com/supabase-community/postgrest-py/pull/422
review_comment_labels:
- label: correct
question: Is this comment correct?
- label: helpful
question: Is this comment helpful?
- label: comment-type
question: Is the comment type correct?
- label: comment-area
question: Is the comment area correct?
- label: llm-test
question: |
What type of LLM test could this comment become?
- 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
- 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
- no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test
# Benchmark reviews generated by running
# python -m scripts.experiment benchmark <experiment_name>
benchmark_reviews: []
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @sourcery-ai-experiments-bot - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!
Here's what I looked at during the review
- 🟡 General issues: 4 issues found
- 🟢 Security: all looks good
- 🟢 Testing: all looks good
- 🟢 Complexity: all looks good
Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment to tell me if it was helpful.
| @@ -11,9 +11,22 @@ pool: | |||
|
|
|||
| steps: | |||
| - task: NodeTool@0 | |||
| - task: DotNetCoreCLI@2 | |||
|
|
|||
| - task: Bash@3 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
issue (code_clarification): Misplaced 'inputs' block under 'Bash@3' task.
The 'inputs' block starting on the next line seems to be intended for the 'DotNetCoreCLI@2' task. Please ensure that each task has its corresponding 'inputs' correctly nested.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What type of LLM test could this comment become?
- 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
- 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
- no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test
| versionSpec: '10.x' | ||
| displayName: 'Install Node.js' | ||
| command: 'build' | ||
| projects: | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
issue (code_clarification): Incorrect nesting of tasks within 'projects' property.
The 'projects' property should not contain tasks. It appears there's a confusion in the YAML structure where tasks are nested under 'projects'. This should be corrected to maintain the proper hierarchy and functionality of the pipeline.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What type of LLM test could this comment become?
- 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
- 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
- no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test
| command: build | ||
| - task: AzureStaticWebApp@0 | ||
| inputs: | ||
| projects: '**/*.csproj' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
question (code_clarification): Clarification needed on the 'projects' parameter for 'AzureStaticWebApp'.
It's unusual to specify a 'projects' parameter for the 'AzureStaticWebApp' task. Typically, this task does not use a 'projects' parameter. Please verify if this is intended or if there might be a mistake in parameter naming.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What type of LLM test could this comment become?
- 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
- 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
- no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test
| displayName: Build | ||
| inputs: | ||
| command: build | ||
| - task: AzureStaticWebApp@0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
issue (code_clarification): Potential misconfiguration in 'AzureStaticWebApp' task.
The 'inputs' block for 'AzureStaticWebApp' task seems to be incorrectly formatted or misplaced. Ensure that the 'inputs' are correctly aligned and properly nested to avoid configuration errors.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What type of LLM test could this comment become?
- 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
- 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
- no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test
No description provided.