Skip to content

chore(ci): drop no-std CI jobs#522

Open
ZocoLini wants to merge 1 commit intov0.42-devfrom
chore/drop-nostd-ci
Open

chore(ci): drop no-std CI jobs#522
ZocoLini wants to merge 1 commit intov0.42-devfrom
chore/drop-nostd-ci

Conversation

@ZocoLini
Copy link
Collaborator

@ZocoLini ZocoLini commented Mar 12, 2026

I dont know if i am forgetting something or i am removing more than what I should

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Removed no-std build verification from the CI pipeline (no-std checks and associated CI job removed).
    • Removed related CLI options and script logic that triggered those checks.
    • CI integration job adjustments: related steps were removed and the integration tests job is temporarily disabled.

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 12, 2026

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 556b9056-5f0a-4c76-8f88-3e1ba8578990

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d27d96a and 8364cd0.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • .github/ci-no-std.yml
  • .github/scripts/ci_config.py
  • .github/workflows/rust.yml
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (3)
  • .github/workflows/rust.yml
  • .github/ci-no-std.yml
  • .github/scripts/ci_config.py

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The pull request removes no-std build verification from CI by deleting the .github/ci-no-std.yml workflow and removing no-std-related logic, CLI flags/subcommand, and command dispatch from the CI configuration script; the No-std Checks job was also removed from .github/workflows/rust.yml.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Deleted CI workflow
.github/ci-no-std.yml
Removed the standalone no-std CI workflow that ran cargo checks for no-std configurations.
CI script changes
.github/scripts/ci_config.py
Deleted run_no_std() and removed the --no-std-file argument, the run-no-std subcommand, and its command mapping from the CLI and dispatch logic.
Workflow job removal
.github/workflows/rust.yml
Removed the No-std Checks job and its steps from the repository CI workflow.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

Poem

🐰 I hopped through branches, swift and spry,
No-std checks packed up and said goodbye,
CI trails leaner, I nibble a carrot,
Tail a-flutter, I skip and ferret 🥕

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3
✅ 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 'chore(ci): drop no-std CI jobs' clearly and concisely describes the main change: removing no-std continuous integration jobs from the workflow.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate docstrings (stacked PR)
  • 📝 Generate docstrings (commit on current branch)
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch chore/drop-nostd-ci
📝 Coding Plan
  • Generate coding plan for human review comments

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.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 12, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 66.86%. Comparing base (33cefc9) to head (8364cd0).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on v0.42-dev.

Additional details and impacted files
@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##           v0.42-dev     #522      +/-   ##
=============================================
- Coverage      66.90%   66.86%   -0.05%     
=============================================
  Files            313      313              
  Lines          64757    64765       +8     
=============================================
- Hits           43325    43303      -22     
- Misses         21432    21462      +30     
Flag Coverage Δ *Carryforward flag
core 75.02% <ø> (+0.09%) ⬆️
dash-network 74.91% <ø> (ø) Carriedforward from 33cefc9
dash-network-ffi 34.76% <ø> (ø) Carriedforward from 33cefc9
dash-spv 68.26% <ø> (ø) Carriedforward from 33cefc9
dash-spv-ffi 34.76% <ø> (ø) Carriedforward from 33cefc9
dashcore 74.91% <ø> (ø) Carriedforward from 33cefc9
dashcore-private 74.91% <ø> (ø) Carriedforward from 33cefc9
dashcore-rpc 19.92% <ø> (ø) Carriedforward from 33cefc9
dashcore-rpc-json 19.92% <ø> (ø) Carriedforward from 33cefc9
dashcore_hashes 74.91% <ø> (ø) Carriedforward from 33cefc9
ffi 36.51% <ø> (+0.10%) ⬆️
key-wallet 65.65% <ø> (ø) Carriedforward from 33cefc9
key-wallet-ffi 34.76% <ø> (ø) Carriedforward from 33cefc9
key-wallet-manager 65.65% <ø> (ø) Carriedforward from 33cefc9
rpc 19.92% <ø> (ø)
spv 81.06% <ø> (-0.05%) ⬇️
wallet 65.68% <ø> (ø)

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.
see 16 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@ZocoLini ZocoLini force-pushed the chore/drop-nostd-ci branch 2 times, most recently from 4fd4913 to d27d96a Compare March 12, 2026 17:32
@ZocoLini ZocoLini force-pushed the chore/drop-nostd-ci branch from d27d96a to 8364cd0 Compare March 12, 2026 21:00
@ZocoLini ZocoLini requested a review from xdustinface March 12, 2026 21:17
Copy link
Collaborator

@xdustinface xdustinface left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I agree with removing the dangling std features for wallet where it only pretends to support it but why do you want to remove the fully supported and tested std feature flags in other crates?

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.

2 participants