release: CLI v0.1.731

[userAugustos]

Summary

• Restore the CLI package version to 0.1.731.
• Use the 0.1.2 dashboard API and web images by default.

Test

• uv lock --check
• uv run --package canyonos pytest packages/cli/tests
• bun run build --filter=canyonos

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Updates
  • Updated the dashboard API and web images to version 0.1.2.

[coderabbitai]

Navigate logical layers of code changes, visualize relationships, and explore their blast radius.

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Advanced

Run ID: e499742c-d661-4eef-8893-d1172ce84a04

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 46345f5 and 2b40124.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)

• uv.lock is excluded by !**/*.lock

📒 Files selected for processing (3)

• packages/cli/canyonos/dashboard_stack.py
• packages/cli/pyproject.toml
• packages/cli/tests/test_dashboard_stack.py

Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review.

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The dashboard API and web image defaults change from 0.1.1 to 0.1.2. The CLI project version changes from 1.1.0 to 0.1.731. A test checks the updated default image references.

Changes

Version updates

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Version declarations and dashboard test packages/cli/canyonos/dashboard_stack.py, packages/cli/pyproject.toml, packages/cli/tests/test_dashboard_stack.py	The API and web image defaults change to tag 0.1.2, and the CLI project version changes to 0.1.731. The environment-preparation test checks both default image references.

Priority: ⬇️ Low

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~3 minutes

Change: Other

Suggested reviewers: saaketh0

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 2b65b

The CLI package version and lockfile agree, and dashboard defaults reach the expected Compose services. Available evidence does not show a missing image tag, so no concrete deployment failure is established; proceed with normal release checks.

Security Architecture Review

Security architecture risk: 🟡 Moderate · up to 2b401

An existing dashboard can be left in an uncertain state if its image update fails, and the behavior of the new images has not been established here. The review did not establish a new access-control bypass.

Retained concerns

• Medium · reliability · inferred: A failed in-place upgrade can leave the recorded desired image versions ahead of the running stack, or leave API and web services only partially reconciled, without restoring the prior images. This weakens failure containment for the newly selected release.

Security review details

Security Blast Radius

• inferred — Each CLI-managed installation using the defaults can select the new API and web images. The API retains its existing all-interface host binding, so image behavior could affect the service reachable at that binding; the number of installations and the images' behavior are unknown.

Trust Boundaries and Controls

• observed — The CLI selects registry image tags for Docker to pull, while Compose supplies the API with the managed JWT secret, database URL, Redis connection settings, and fixed_code authentication setting. The visible change does not alter that configuration; it cannot establish how the new images use it.

Resilience and Maintainability Implications

• inferred — Health checks and failure logs aid detection, but preserving preexisting containers on a failed upgrade does not establish that the prior API and web versions or their expected security behavior have been restored.

Hardening Proposals

• proposed — Verify the 0.1.2 image provenance, runtime privileges, authentication behavior, and compatibility with existing dashboard state before treating the tag change as authority-equivalent to 0.1.1.
• proposed — Track the observed deployed versions separately from desired versions and define recovery to a known-good API/web pair after a failed or interrupted existing-stack upgrade.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 1 functions across 2 files. (1 skipped: 1 …	Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly identifies the main change: preparing the CLI release for version 0.1.731. This matches the project version update and PR objective.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

Full details: Docstring Coverage

Explanation

Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 1 functions across 2 files. (1 skipped: 1 unsupported.)

✨ Finishing Touches 💡 1

📝 Generate docstrings 💡

• Commit to this branch
• Create a new PR

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Commit to this branch
• Create a new PR

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

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