Skip to content

Conversation

@Artmann
Copy link
Member

@Artmann Artmann commented Nov 10, 2025

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation

    • Updated bug report templates with refined environment data collection fields.
    • Simplified issue reporting form to focus on essential diagnostic information.
  • Chores

    • Updated command categorization for consistency across the product interface.

@Artmann Artmann requested a review from a team as a code owner November 10, 2025 15:15
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 10, 2025

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This PR updates issue templates and configuration to reflect a rebrand from Jupyter to Deepnote. Changes include renaming environment-data fields (Jupyter Extension Version → Deepnote Extension Version), removing Jupyter-specific fields (Jupyter server, virtual environment), updating labels in issue forms (Notebooks .ipynb → .deepnote files), and changing the package.json command category for deepnote.viewOutput from "Jupyter" to "Deepnote". No functional logic is modified.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • saltenasl

Pre-merge checks

✅ 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 accurately reflects the main changes: updating bug report templates from Jupyter to Deepnote references across multiple template files.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Disabled knowledge base sources:

  • Linear integration is disabled by default for public repositories

You can enable these sources in your CodeRabbit configuration.

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b817a89 and 9ed4cff.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/1_bug_report.md (2 hunks)
  • .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/2_bug_form.yml (2 hunks)
  • package.json (1 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
  • GitHub Check: Build & Test
🔇 Additional comments (6)
package.json (1)

346-349: Rebrand terminology aligned in command category. The deepnote.viewOutput command category updated from "Jupyter" to "Deepnote" is consistent with the PR's rebrand objective. ✓

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/1_bug_report.md (2)

11-14: Environment data fields appropriately streamlined for Deepnote. Removed Jupyter-specific fields (server, venv) while retaining OS and Python/Anaconda version info, which remain relevant for debugging. Field label correctly updated from "Jupyter Extension version" to "Deepnote Extension version."


38-39: Output panel reference updated. Terminology changed from "Jupyter" to "Deepnote" to align with command naming and UI conventions across the rebrand.

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/2_bug_form.yml (3)

22-22: File extension label updated correctly. Changed from .ipynb to .deepnote to reflect Deepnote's native notebook format.


39-42: Field rename verified—no upstream references found.

Comprehensive search across all files, GitHub workflows, and configuration scripts confirms zero references to the old jupyter-version field id. The rename to deepnote-version is isolated and safe.


48-49: Verify the "Deepnote Show Output" command reference — it does not appear in the codebase.

The search found deepnote.viewOutput as the output-viewing command, but no command literally named "Deepnote Show Output." The user-facing command title may differ from the command ID due to localization strings (e.g., "%deepnote.command.deepnote.viewOutput.title%"), but the exact reference should be confirmed against actual extension documentation or command palette to avoid misleading users filing bugs.


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

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 10, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 73%. Comparing base (b817a89) to head (9ed4cff).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files
@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##            main    #198   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage     73%     73%           
=====================================
  Files        577     577           
  Lines      47663   47663           
  Branches    5597    5597           
=====================================
  Hits       34939   34939           
  Misses     10887   10887           
  Partials    1837    1837           
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@saltenasl saltenasl merged commit b9a2957 into main Nov 10, 2025
13 checks passed
@saltenasl saltenasl deleted the chris/update-issue-templates branch November 10, 2025 15:27
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.

3 participants