8000 docs: clarify PR review eligibility (#378) by hardikkgupta · Pull Request #396 · coderabbitai/coderabbit-docs · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to content

docs: clarify PR review eligibility (#378) #396
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

hardikkgupta
Copy link

Adds "Review eligibility" section to clarify which PRs CodeRabbit reviews.

Tackles #378

Signed-off-by: electricplayer <40640596+electricplayer@users.noreply.github.com>
Copy link
Contributor
coderabbitai bot commented Jun 11, 2025

Walkthrough

The documentation was updated to add a "Review eligibility" section, explaining when CodeRabbit will review pull requests for public and private repositories. The section also includes an embedded ProPlanNotice component to display information about the Pro plan requirements for private repositories.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
docs/guides/code-review-overview.md Added a "Review eligibility" section detailing review conditions for public/private repositories; embedded ProPlanNotice component.

Poem

In the docs a section grew,
Explaining what our bot will do—
Public repos? Reviews for all!
Private ones? Pro plan’s the call.
A notice hops in, clear and bright,
So every dev can see the light.
🐇✨

Impact Analysis

[ℹ️ LOW 🔄 Impacts behavior] Clarification of automatic pull request review eligibility in documentation

The documentation now clearly explains which pull requests are automatically reviewed by CodeRabbit, specifying the differences between public and private repositories and the requirements for Pro plan users. This helps users better understand when to expect automatic reviews, but does not alter any product functionality or user workflows.

Review the updated documentation section to ensure the eligibility criteria are accurately described and the ProPlanNotice component displays as intended. Verify clarity and correctness from a user's perspective.


📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 057d05d and e7368f8.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • docs/guides/code-review-overview.md (2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • docs/guides/code-review-overview.md
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Explain this complex logic.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai explain this code block.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
  • @coderabbitai auto-generate unit tests to generate unit tests for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@NatoBoram NatoBoram requested a review from guritfaq July 4, 2025 19:19
@jmacdotorg jmacdotorg self-requested a review July 7, 2025 15:34
@@ -14,6 +16,15 @@ This information, usually added to pull requests within minutes, can help your t
The following sections present an overview of this feature. For a hands-on example that lets you experience a CodeRabbit code review using
a real repository, see [Quickstart](/getting-started/quickstart).

## Review eligibility {#eligibility}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since many of our headers start with imperative verbs, I am cautious about starting headers with "Review" as a noun like this, since it's ambiguous. This could be read as "Here is how you review something for eligibility."

How about moving this into a level-three section, after the "Events that trigger automated reviews" section? And retitling it "Which pull requests get automatically reviewed".

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done!


CodeRabbit will review your pull request if one of the following is true:

- **Public repositories:** CodeRabbit reviews every PR by default.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This needs a reword for clarity. How about:

"The pull request is part of a public repository. CodeRabbit automatically reviews pull requests against the main branch of your public repositories, by default. This feature is available to all subscription tiers, including the free plan."

Part of my nitpick here is that the list lead-in makes us expect a list or true-or-false statement, but "Public repositories" isn't really a statement that can be true or false. The bolded sentence I suggest above is true-or-false, though. Make sense?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That makes sense!

CodeRabbit will review your pull request if one of the following is true:

- **Public repositories:** CodeRabbit reviews every PR by default.
- **Private repositories:** CodeRabbit reviews PRs only when your organization has a Pro plan **and** you have an assigned seat.
8000
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Apply the same strategy as above to this one, too. (And let's spell out "pull request".)

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wrote it as: The pull request is in a private repository and your organization is on the Pro plan with a seat assigned to you

Signed-off-by: electricplayer <40640596+electricplayer@users.noreply.github.com>
Copy link
Contributor
@jmacdotorg jmacdotorg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM; one small cleanup request (see comment)

CodeRabbit automatically reviews a pull request when **either** of the following statements is true:

- **The pull request is in a public repository.** CodeRabbit reviews pull requests against the main branch of your public repositories by default. This feature is available to every subscription tier, including the free plan.
- **The pull request is in a private repository and your organization is on the Pro plan with a seat assigned to you.** Only under this condition does CodeRabbit review private-repository pull requests.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Now that we're using full sentences, this looks like way too much bolding, heh. Let's un-bold the bold text from both of these bullets and I think we're good.

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
0