Skip to content

ci: route Linux runner through NSC_RUNNER variable#4133

Merged
protoquinn[bot] merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
ci/namespace-runner-override
Jun 24, 2026
Merged

ci: route Linux runner through NSC_RUNNER variable#4133
protoquinn[bot] merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
ci/namespace-runner-override

Conversation

@mabry1985

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Route Linux runner through NSC_RUNNER

Part of the org-wide migration off Namespace toward self-hosted runners.

Converts hardcoded runs-on: namespace-profile-protolabs-linux to the override pattern already standard in the plugin repos:

runs-on: ${{ vars.NSC_RUNNER || 'namespace-profile-protolabs-linux' }}

No behavior change today — with NSC_RUNNER unset, every job still runs on Namespace. Once self-hosted runners are live, setting the org-level NSC_RUNNER variable moves the entire fleet at once, with no further workflow edits.

Converted 18 workflow line(s) in this repo.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Replaces hardcoded `runs-on: namespace-profile-protolabs-linux` with
`${{ vars.NSC_RUNNER || 'namespace-profile-protolabs-linux' }}`, matching
the override pattern already standard across the plugin repos.

No behavior change: with NSC_RUNNER unset, jobs still run on Namespace.
This lets the whole fleet move to self-hosted runners by setting a single
org-level Actions variable instead of editing every workflow.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@protoquinn

protoquinn Bot commented Jun 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

👀 Quinn is reviewing — verdict (PASS / WARN / FAIL) + findings to follow.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jun 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Review limit reached

@mabry1985, we couldn't start this review because you've reached your PR review rate limit.

More reviews will be available in 59 minutes and 36 seconds. Learn how PR review limits work.

Your organization has run out of usage credits. Purchase more credits in the billing tab to continue.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based credits.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please see our Fair Usage Limits Policy for further information.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 5eb1e9b2-d120-4f9e-a1ac-7155c6930e62

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 58ab442 and e5fac38.

📒 Files selected for processing (16)
  • .github/workflows/auto-release.yml
  • .github/workflows/checks.yml
  • .github/workflows/close-external-prs.yml
  • .github/workflows/create-protolab-test.yml
  • .github/workflows/deploy-docs.yml
  • .github/workflows/deploy-site.yml
  • .github/workflows/e2e-tests.yml
  • .github/workflows/harness-eval.yml
  • .github/workflows/idea-accepted.yml
  • .github/workflows/langfuse-prompt-sync.yml
  • .github/workflows/pr-check.yml
  • .github/workflows/regenerate-site.yml
  • .github/workflows/stale.yml
  • .github/workflows/test.yml
  • .github/workflows/triage.yml
  • .github/workflows/workflow-security-lint.yml
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch ci/namespace-runner-override

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@protoquinn protoquinn Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

QA Audit — PR #4133 | ci: route Linux runner through NSC_RUNNER variable

VERDICT: WARN (CI still pending — non-terminal)


CI Status

  • All 9 checks queued (workflow-security-lint, deploy, build, test, checks, 4 matrix test jobs)
  • ⏳ Non-terminal — formal PASS/FAIL deferred until CI completes

Diff Review

  • Mechanical conversion of runs-on: stanzas across 14 workflow files
  • Pattern: runs-on: ${{ vars.NSC_RUNNER || 'namespace-profile-protolabs-linux' }}
  • Fallback preserves exact current behavior; no-op until NSC_RUNNER is set
  • Expression syntax correct — standard GitHub Actions variable resolution with || fallback
  • No security or correctness issues observed

Observations

  • LOW: clawpatch structural review unavailable (repo not in project registry) — diff-only review
  • GAP: PR claims 18 line conversions; diff (truncated at 227 lines) shows 16 — may just be truncation artifact, but full count unverified

— Quinn, QA Engineer

@protoquinn

protoquinn Bot commented Jun 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Submitted COMMENT review on #4133.

@protoquinn protoquinn Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

CI terminal-green, no blockers on prior review — auto-approving on green (#748).

@protoquinn protoquinn Bot merged commit 97cb9b4 into main Jun 24, 2026
13 checks passed
@protoquinn protoquinn Bot deleted the ci/namespace-runner-override branch June 24, 2026 10:59
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.

1 participant