Skip to content

chore(effect): bump published provider/sandbox/agent pins to 0.4.23/0.4.26/0.12.1 - #255

Merged
ThomasK33 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
effect-pins-sep26
Sep 26, 2026
Merged

ThomasK33 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
effect-pins-sep26

Conversation

@ThomasK33

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Bumps packages/effect (private, unpublished @coder/ai-sdk-effect) to the just-published Coder packages, following #247 and #250.

Changes (4 files)

File Change
packages/effect/package.json @coder/ai-sdk-provider 0.4.22 → 0.4.23, @coder/ai-sdk-sandbox 0.4.25 → 0.4.26, @coder/ai-sdk-agent 0.12.0 → 0.12.1. @ai-sdk/provider stays 4.0.18.
pnpm-lock.yaml Only the three @coder/* entries move. No other package changes. Integrity hashes match npm view … dist.integrity.
pnpm-workspace.yaml Only the three exact minimumReleaseAgeExclude entries move to the new versions (authorized own-package 24h exception).
packages/effect/README.md The three Coder pinned-version rows.

@ai-sdk/provider: npm view shows that published provider 0.4.23 and agent 0.12.1 both depend on exactly 4.0.18. The lockfile keeps a single @ai-sdk/provider@4.0.18 (2 lockfile lines, as before).

Validation

  • Local toolchain: mise Node v26.10.0 (checked inside pnpm exec) and pnpm 11.27.0.
  • Empty store and empty cache: rm -rf node_modules && pnpm install --frozen-lockfile passes with the final three-entry exclusion list.
  • pnpm check, pnpm -r build, pnpm -r test, pnpm publint, pnpm attw: all pass.
  • Live against dogfood.cdr.dev (v2.37.3-devel+b55f721f24): agent e2e 7/7, effect e2e 2/2.

Generated with xum • Model: anthropic:claude-opus-5-5 • Thinking: high

….4.26/0.12.1

Bump the private @coder/ai-sdk-effect package's published Coder pins to
the releases cut on 2026-09-26: @coder/ai-sdk-provider 0.4.23,
@coder/ai-sdk-sandbox 0.4.26, @coder/ai-sdk-agent 0.12.1. @ai-sdk/provider
stays 4.0.18, matching both published packages' exact dependency. The three
exact minimumReleaseAgeExclude entries move to the new versions (own-package
24h exception), and the README pin table follows.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Kosiewski <tk@coder.com>

---
_Generated with [`xum`](https://github.com/coder/xum) • Model: `anthropic:claude-opus-5-5` • Thinking: `high`_

Change-Id: I2d4620a10b08f12a595393eaf947a2205dd446c3
@ThomasK33

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex review

@ThomasK33

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex security review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Sep 26, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-09-26T00:57:19.198460Z ca79916 Manual request
🔒 Security Review ✅ Completed 2026-09-26T00:58:32.165492Z ca79916 Manual request
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. What shall we delve into next?

Reviewed commit: ca799165eb

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🛡️ Codex Security Review

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: ca799165eb

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

@ThomasK33
ThomasK33 added this pull request to the merge queue Sep 26, 2026
Merged via the queue into main with commit 2315738 Sep 26, 2026
6 checks passed
@ThomasK33
ThomasK33 deleted the effect-pins-sep26 branch September 26, 2026 01:23
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