Fixed pnpm 'Unexpected input' deployment error

[palisadoes]

Fixed pnpm 'Unexpected input' deployment error

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Updated GitHub Actions workflow for website deployment
  • Modified deployment command configuration
  • Performed minor formatting and whitespace adjustments in workflow file

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The pull request involves modifications to a GitHub Actions workflow file for website deployment. The changes primarily consist of formatting updates, such as quote style adjustments and whitespace modifications. The most notable functional change is updating the deployment command from pnpm deploy to pnpm run deploy, which may impact how the deployment script is executed within the pnpm environment.

Changes

File	Change Summary
.github/workflows/push-deploy-website.yml	- Replaced single quotes with double quotes for branch name - Minor whitespace formatting adjustments - Updated deployment command from pnpm deploy to pnpm run deploy

Note: No changes were made to exported or public entity declarations.

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f8416f1 and acdac6e.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• .github/workflows/push-deploy-website.yml (3 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (3)

.github/workflows/push-deploy-website.yml (3)

17-18: LGTM! Quote style is consistent with YAML best practices.

---

29-33: Excellent documentation of environment configuration requirements!

The added comments clearly explain the relationship between branch names and GitHub Pages environment settings, which is crucial for maintainers.

---

61-64: Good fix! Using pnpm run deploy is more explicit and correct.

The change from pnpm deploy to pnpm run deploy properly addresses the 'Unexpected input' error by explicitly invoking the script from package.json. The added error handling with descriptive messages is also a good improvement.

Let's verify the deploy script exists in package.json:

✅ Verification successful

Deploy script is correctly defined in package.json

The verification confirms that the deploy script exists in docs/package.json and is properly configured to run docusaurus deploy. This validates that the change from pnpm deploy to pnpm run deploy in the workflow file will work as expected.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the deploy script exists in docs/package.json
jq -r '.scripts.deploy' docs/package.json

Length of output: 59

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 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.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • 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 generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @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 generate unit testing code.
  • @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.

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. (Beta)
• @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.

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.

[github-actions]

Our Pull Request Approval Process

Thanks for contributing!

Testing Your Code

Remember, your PRs won't be reviewed until these criteria are met:

1. We don't merge PRs with poor code quality.
   1. Follow coding best practices such that CodeRabbit.ai approves your PR.
2. We don't merge PRs with failed tests.
   1. When tests fail, click on the Details link to learn more.
   2. Write sufficient tests for your changes (CodeCov Patch Test). Your testing level must be better than the target threshold of the repository
   3. Tests may fail if you edit sensitive files. Ask to add the ignore-sensitive-files-pr label if the edits are necessary.
3. We cannot merge PRs with conflicting files. These must be fixed.

Our policies make our code better.

Reviewers

Do not assign reviewers. Our Queue Monitors will review your PR and assign them.
When your PR has been assigned reviewers contact them to get your code reviewed and approved via:

1. comments in this PR or
2. our slack channel

Reviewing Your Code

Your reviewer(s) will have the following roles:

1. arbitrators of future discussions with other contributors about the validity of your changes
2. point of contact for evaluating the validity of your work
3. person who verifies matching issues by others that should be closed.
4. person who gives general guidance in fixing your tests

CONTRIBUTING.md

Read our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:

1. PRs with issues not assigned to you will be closed by the reviewer
2. Fix the first comment in the PR so that each issue listed automatically closes

Other

1. 🎯 Please be considerate of our volunteers' time. Contacting the person who assigned the reviewers is not advised unless they ask for your input. Do not @ the person who did the assignment otherwise.
2. Read the CONTRIBUTING.md file make