Commit Graph

7 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Alexander Brown
3e197b5c57 docs: ADR 0008 — Entity Component System (#10420)
## Summary

Architecture documentation proposing an Entity Component System for the
litegraph layer.

```mermaid
graph LR
    subgraph Today["Today: Spaghetti"]
        God["🍝 God Objects"]
        Circ["🔄 Circular Deps"]
        Mut["💥 Render Mutations"]
    end

    subgraph Tomorrow["Tomorrow: ECS"]
        ID["🏷️ Branded IDs"]
        Comp["📦 Components"]
        Sys["⚙️ Systems"]
        World["🌍 World"]
    end

    God -->|"decompose"| Comp
    Circ -->|"flatten"| ID
    Mut -->|"separate"| Sys
    Comp --> World
    ID --> World
    Sys -->|"query"| World
```

## Changes

- **What**: ADR 0008 + 4 architecture docs (no code changes)
- `docs/adr/0008-entity-component-system.md` — entity taxonomy, branded
IDs, component decomposition, migration strategy
- `docs/architecture/entity-interactions.md` — as-is Mermaid diagrams of
all entity relationships
- `docs/architecture/entity-problems.md` — structural problems with
file:line evidence
- `docs/architecture/ecs-target-architecture.md` — target architecture
diagrams
- `docs/architecture/proto-ecs-stores.md` — analysis of existing Pinia
stores as proto-ECS patterns

## Review Focus

- Does the entity taxonomy (Node, Link, Subgraph, Widget, Slot, Reroute,
Group) cover all cases?
- Are the component decompositions reasonable starting points?
- Is the migration strategy (bridge layer, incremental extraction)
feasible?
- Are there entity interactions or problems we missed?

┆Issue is synchronized with this [Notion
page](https://www.notion.so/PR-10420-docs-ADR-0008-Entity-Component-System-32d6d73d365081feb048d16a5231d350)
by [Unito](https://www.unito.io)

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: GitHub Action <action@github.com>
Co-authored-by: Amp <amp@ampcode.com>
Co-authored-by: Christian Byrne <cbyrne@comfy.org>
2026-03-26 16:14:44 -07:00
Benjamin Lu
e31d98b743 fix: block missing e2e regression coverage in CodeRabbit (#9987)
## Summary

Make the CodeRabbit end-to-end regression coverage check actually block
fix-like PRs until it is resolved or explicitly overridden by a
requested reviewer, and harden the prompt so it evaluates only PR-local
metadata.

## Changes

- **What**: Set the `End-to-end regression coverage for fixes` custom
check mode from `warning` to `error`
- **What**: Enable `reviews.request_changes_workflow` so CodeRabbit can
block on failed `error` pre-merge checks
- **What**: Set
`reviews.pre_merge_checks.override_requested_reviewers_only` to `true`
so only requested reviewers can bypass a failed check
- **What**: Tighten the custom check instructions to use only PR
metadata in review context, avoid shell commands, and avoid reverse-diff
or base-branch file evaluation

## Review Focus

Confirm this is the intended CodeRabbit enforcement model for missing
Playwright regression coverage on fix-like PRs and that the prompt
wording is strict enough to avoid false positives from reversed diffs.
2026-03-15 19:06:10 -07:00
Benjamin Lu
9447a1f5d6 test: warn on fix PRs without e2e regression coverage (#9880)
## Summary

Add a CodeRabbit pre-merge warning for fix-like PRs that do not update
`browser_tests/` and do not explain why no end-to-end regression test
was added.

Requested by Christian

┆Issue is synchronized with this [Notion
page](https://www.notion.so/PR-9880-test-warn-on-fix-PRs-without-e2e-regression-coverage-3226d73d3650816eb3e1c1c7d0824edd)
by [Unito](https://www.unito.io)
2026-03-13 09:57:56 -07:00
Christian Byrne
59c3215296 fix: skip CodeRabbit reviews on bot and release PRs (#9279)
## Problem

CodeRabbit is reviewing release and backport PRs created by bots (e.g.
[#9264](https://github.com/Comfy-Org/ComfyUI_frontend/pull/9264)),
leaving unnecessary review comments.

## Solution

Add ignore rules to `.coderabbit.yaml`:

- **`ignore_usernames`**: `comfy-pr-bot`, `github-actions` — skips
reviews on PRs authored by these bot accounts
- **`ignore_title_keywords`**: `[release]`, `[backport` — skips reviews
on release and backport PRs by title

┆Issue is synchronized with this [Notion
page](https://www.notion.so/PR-9279-fix-skip-CodeRabbit-reviews-on-bot-and-release-PRs-3146d73d3650814c9ebae0d08acbafd6)
by [Unito](https://www.unito.io)

---------

Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-02-28 23:29:21 -08:00
Christian Byrne
7c6e2d2c7a fix: disable CodeRabbit high_level_summary to stop PR description auto-updates (#8615)
## Summary

Disables the `high_level_summary` feature in CodeRabbit's configuration.
This feature automatically modifies the PR description every time a
commit is pushed, which was causing frustration for developers.

## Changes

- Set `high_level_summary: false` in `.coderabbit.yaml`

## Context

Discussed in #frontend-code-reviews Slack channel. The team agreed that
having PR descriptions automatically modified with every commit push is
not desirable behavior.

---

Fixes
https://www.notion.so/comfy-org/Ops-Disable-high_level_summary-in-ComfyUI_frontend-coderabbit-yaml-2fd6d73d3650812b9eb8d6680fa11932

┆Issue is synchronized with this [Notion
page](https://www.notion.so/PR-8615-fix-disable-CodeRabbit-high_level_summary-to-stop-PR-description-auto-updates-2fe6d73d36508112ac16f5df51845fcd)
by [Unito](https://www.unito.io)
2026-02-04 18:37:44 -08:00
Christian Byrne
eb1d08e9fe feat: enable CodeRabbit reviews on draft PRs (#8587)
Enable CodeRabbit to automatically review draft pull requests.

## Changes
- Added `reviews.auto_review.drafts: true` to `.coderabbit.yaml`

This allows getting early feedback from CodeRabbit while PRs are still
in draft status.

<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->

## Summary by CodeRabbit

* **New Features**
  * Enabled automatic review drafting to streamline the review process.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->

┆Issue is synchronized with this [Notion
page](https://www.notion.so/PR-8587-feat-enable-CodeRabbit-reviews-on-draft-PRs-2fc6d73d365081ea8f1bcae4a2a8277b)
by [Unito](https://www.unito.io)
2026-02-03 13:41:29 -08:00
Benjamin Lu
aa979aa98c Enable CodeRabbit issue enrichment (#8543)
## Summary

Enable CodeRabbit issue enrichment and remove duplicate-check
requirements to lower the barrier for reporting problems.

## Changes

- **What**: Add `.coderabbit.yaml` enabling issue enrichment; remove
dedupe checkboxes from bug and feature issue templates.

## Review Focus

Confirm we want CodeRabbit/Dosu to handle deduplication so users aren’t
blocked by a mandatory “search for duplicates” step.

┆Issue is synchronized with this [Notion
page](https://www.notion.so/PR-8543-Enable-CodeRabbit-issue-enrichment-2fb6d73d36508132947acf5f01c9cb22)
by [Unito](https://www.unito.io)


<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->

## Summary by CodeRabbit

* **Chores**
  * Enabled automatic issue enrichment to enhance issue tracking.
* Streamlined issue submission forms by removing prerequisite
verification steps from bug report and feature request templates.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2026-02-02 12:06:34 -08:00