Repository navigation
chore(deps): hold proptest for cargo vet, not for the old MSRV (LAB-11225) - #139
Conversation
rust-version is now 1.91, so proptest 1.12.0 (rust-version 1.88) builds on the CI floor and the MSRV hold and its separateMinorPatch rule go. proptest still cannot land in the rust-dev-deps group unattended: supply-chain/ exempts only proptest 1.11.0 and does not trust its publisher, so every new version fails cargo vet, and 1.12.0 also brings in crates that nothing in supply-chain/ covers yet. That is the reason xxhash-rust is held, so proptest joins that rule.
Code Review Completed! 🔥The code review was successfully completed based on your current configurations. Kody Guide: Usage and ConfigurationInteracting with Kody
Providing Context (Files & MCPs)Add these hints in your PR description (or a comment) to unlock deeper checks:
Current Kody ConfigurationReview OptionsThe following review options are enabled or disabled:
|
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review.
|
| Layer / File(s) | Summary |
|---|---|
Update and approval rules renovate.json |
The separate proptest patch-separation and approval-hold rules were removed. The cargo-vet approval rule now covers proptest and xxhash-rust, and its description records proptest audit details and removal conditions. |
Priority:
Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~8 minutes
Change: Other
Possibly related PRs
- cachekit-io/cachekit-core#136: Added the
proptestRenovate hold andseparateMinorPatchrule that this change removes. - cachekit-io/cachekit-core#137: Raised the crate and CI Rust floor; this change refers to the updated MSRV when removing the old
proptesthold.
Suggested reviewers: kodus-27b
Merge Risk: 
Minimal · up to ea63b
-
No actionable merge-blocking risk was identified in the Renovate configuration changes.
Pre-merge checks: 
5
-
Full details: Docstring Coverage
-
Explanation
No eligible functions found in the changed files. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0 files. (1 skipped: 1 unsupported.)
-
Finishing Touches
-
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
-
- Commit to this branch
- Create a new PR
-
- Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts
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 @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.
Replaces the proptest MSRV hold with a cargo-vet hold: proptest joins the existing xxhash-rust rule, and the two proptest rules from #136 (the minor/major hold and its
separateMinorPatchsplit) go.The MSRV reason is gone. proptest 1.12.0 declares
rust-version = "1.88". #137 raised the crate'srust-versionand the CI floor job to 1.91, and the full suite passes on 1.91 with proptest 1.12.0 (cargo +1.91 test --all-features: 250 passed, 0 failed).A second reason was hiding behind it.
supply-chain/config.tomlexempts only proptest 1.11.0 (safe-to-run), no imported feed audits it, andaudits.tomldoes not trust its publisher. So every new proptest version fails cargo vet, the same as xxhash-rust. 1.12.0 also brings in seven crates thatsupply-chain/does not cover yet. Withcargo update -p proptest --precise 1.12.0, plaincargo vet(as CI runs it) onmain's store:mainitself passes. Dropping the hold outright would regenerate arust-dev-depsgroup that failsCargo Vet (Supply Chain). Recording those entries is a supply-chain trust decision for whoever approves the update, so proptest now waits under Pending Approval on the Dependency Dashboard, and the approver adds the entries on that branch, as with xxhash-rust. Vulnerability updates are still not held. The rule now holds proptest patches too, because a patch also falls outside the version-pinned exemption.What Renovate proposes (Renovate 43.288.0 lookup dry-run against
main's tree, org preset inlined): proptest 1.11.0 → 1.12.0 stays on its own branchrenovate/proptest-1.x-lockfile, as before. No other cargo update changes branch.renovate-config-validator --strictpasses. No code change. Docs: none needed; the reason lives in the rule'sdescription, and no doc mentions these rules.