Skip to content

chore(deps): [WPB-9777] Update zizmorcore/zizmor-action action to v0.6.1 - #4354

Open
renovate[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
developfrom
renovate/zizmorcore-zizmor-action-0.x
Open

chore(deps): [WPB-9777] Update zizmorcore/zizmor-action action to v0.6.1#4354
renovate[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
developfrom
renovate/zizmorcore-zizmor-action-0.x

Conversation

@renovate

@renovate renovate Bot commented Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

https://wearezeta.atlassian.net/browse/WPB-9777

This PR contains the following updates:

Package Type Update Change
zizmorcore/zizmor-action action minor v0.5.6v0.6.1

Warning

Some dependencies could not be looked up. Check the Dependency Dashboard for more information.


Release Notes

zizmorcore/zizmor-action (zizmorcore/zizmor-action)

v0.6.1

Compare Source

zizmor 1.28.0 is now the default version used by the action.

v0.6.0

Compare Source

zizmor 1.27.0 is now the default version used by the action.

What's Changed

New Contributors

Full Changelog: zizmorcore/zizmor-action@v0.5.7...v0.6.0

v0.5.7

Compare Source

1.26.1 is now available via the action
1.26.1 is now the default version of zizmor used by the action


Configuration

📅 Schedule: (UTC)

  • Branch creation
    • "before 5am on monday"
  • Automerge
    • At any time (no schedule defined)

🚦 Automerge: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied.

Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.


  • If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

This PR was generated by Mend Renovate. View the repository job log.

@renovate
renovate Bot requested a review from a team as a code owner July 31, 2026 15:15
@renovate
renovate Bot requested review from ohassine and sbakhtiarov and removed request for a team July 31, 2026 15:15
@atlassian atlassian Bot mentioned this pull request Jul 31, 2026
49 tasks
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Test Results

6 131 tests  ±0   5 988 ✅ ±0   4m 26s ⏱️ -4s
  916 suites ±0     143 💤 ±0 
  916 files   ±0       0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit 982877f. ± Comparison against base commit 24033ed.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

@codecov-commenter

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 61.20%. Comparing base (24033ed) to head (982877f).

Additional details and impacted files
@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##             develop    #4354      +/-   ##
=============================================
- Coverage      61.20%   61.20%   -0.01%     
  Complexity      4236     4236              
=============================================
  Files           2199     2199              
  Lines          71537    71537              
  Branches        7224     7224              
=============================================
- Hits           43787    43784       -3     
- Misses         24898    24899       +1     
- Partials        2852     2854       +2     

see 3 files with indirect coverage changes


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Harness.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 24033ed...982877f. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🐰 Bencher Report

Branch${GITHUB_HEAD_REF}
Testbedubuntu-latest

⚠️ WARNING: No Threshold found!

Without a Threshold, no Alerts will ever be generated.

Click here to create a new Threshold
For more information, see the Threshold documentation.
To only post results if a Threshold exists, set the --ci-only-thresholds flag.

Click to view all benchmark results
BenchmarkLatencymicroseconds (µs)
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.logic.CoreLogicBenchmark.createObjectInFiles📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
914.49 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.logic.CoreLogicBenchmark.createObjectInMemory📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
567,648.96 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.persistence.MessageReadBenchmark.inboxPagingDeepPageBenchmark📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
135,117.44 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.persistence.MessageReadBenchmark.inboxPagingFirstPageBenchmark📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
130,013.33 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.persistence.MessageReadBenchmark.localMarkAsReadBenchmark📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
3,354.27 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.persistence.MessageReadBenchmark.messagePagingDeepPageBenchmark📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
27,927.20 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.persistence.MessageReadBenchmark.messagePagingFirstPageBenchmark📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
13,208.02 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.persistence.MessagesNoPragmaTuneBenchmark.messageInsertionBenchmark📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
1,380,537.84 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.persistence.MessagesNoPragmaTuneBenchmark.queryMessagesBenchmark📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
21,404.92 µs
🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

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