Renovate Review

Semantic Versioning

We assume packages follow Semantic Versioning. Fix and minor should contain no breaking changes per semver

In all cases you must:

• Focus on verifying the upgrade doesn't introduce regressions
• Check if CI passes

Major Upgrades

1. Research breaking changes by:

   • Fetching the GitHub releases page: https://github.com/<owner>/<repo>/releases
   • Looking for a CHANGELOG.md in the repository
   • Checking the package's migration guide if available

2. Identify which breaking changes may affect this codebase

3. Analyze Codebase Impact

Search for usage of the upgraded package:

1. Find imports/requires of the package
2. Identify which files and features depend on it
3. For major upgrades: check if any deprecated/removed APIs are used

4. Generate Safety Assessment

Create a markdown comment with the following structure:

## Dependency Upgrade Review: `<package-name>`

<!-- For High risk only, add at the top: -->

> [!CAUTION]
> Breaking changes affect this codebase. Code changes required before merge.

<!-- For Medium risk only, add at the top: -->

> [!WARNING]
> Major upgrade with breaking changes. Review recommended.

`<old>` → `<new>` (**patch** / **minor** / **major**)

**Risk:** Low / Medium / High
**Impact:** <count> files
**Recommendation:** Safe to merge / Review recommended / Changes required

<one-line explanation>

<details>
<summary>Affected files</summary>

- `path/to/file.ts`
- ...

</details>

<!-- For major upgrades only: -->
<details>
<summary>Breaking changes</summary>

- <breaking change 1>
- <breaking change 2>

</details>

<details>
<summary>Required code changes</summary>

- <change 1>
- <change 2>

<!-- Or "None" if no changes needed -->

</details>

5. Post the Comment (if --comment flag provided)

Only post the comment to the PR if the --comment flag was included in the arguments.

If --comment is provided:

gh pr comment <pr-number> --body "<assessment>"

If --comment is NOT provided, skip this step and only display the assessment locally.

Rating Guidelines

Risk:

• Low: Patch/minor upgrade, or major with no relevant breaking changes
• Medium: Major upgrade with breaking changes that don't affect current usage
• High: Major upgrade with breaking changes that affect current usage

Impact:

• Low: < 5 files, simple usage patterns
• Medium: 5-20 files, moderate complexity
• High: > 20 files, or critical infrastructure dependency

Recommendation:

• Safe to merge: CI passes, no breaking changes affect us
• Review recommended: Minor concerns, human review advised
• Changes required: Code modifications needed before merge