Changed text from "Usage" to "usage" in UI #1362
Conversation
![llamapreview[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1023541?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Auto Pull Request Review from LlamaPReview
Review Status: Automated Review Skipped
Dear contributor,
Thank you for your Pull Request. LlamaPReview has analyzed your changes and determined that this PR does not require an automated code review.
Analysis Result:
PR contains only a minor UI text update from 'Usage' to 'usage' in the UI, which is a style/formatting change and does not impact core logic, functionality, or security. The change is well-contained, and the PR is granular and targeted to one specific feature only, as mentioned by the author. Therefore, no automated code review is required.
We're continuously improving our PR analysis capabilities. Have thoughts on when and how LlamaPReview should perform automated reviews? Share your insights in our GitHub Discussions.
Best regards,
LlamaPReview Team
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces modifications to the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: .coderabbit.yaml 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🔇 Additional comments (3)Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/Details/index.jsx (3)
The changes to lowercase "usage" in gauge box headings align with the PR objective of maintaining consistent capitalization throughout the UI. Also applies to: 295-295
The changes to lowercase "usage" in y-axis labels and tooltips maintain consistency with the gauge box headings and overall UI capitalization standards. Also applies to: 375-375, 386-386, 394-394 Line range hint While the changes look good, let's ensure we haven't missed any other instances of "Usage" that should be updated. ✅ Verification successfulLet me try a different approach to search for usage-related text in the codebase. The previous command had an issue with file type recognition, so I'm using a more comprehensive search with explicit file extensions and directory exclusions. Let me try one more time with a simpler ripgrep approach using glob patterns instead of file types. This should help us find all instances of "usage" in JavaScript and TypeScript files. Capitalization is consistent across the application Looking at the search results, all user-facing instances of "usage" in headings and labels consistently use the capitalization pattern "Memory usage", "CPU usage", and "Disk usage". The other occurrences are either in code variables, database fields, or configuration, which follow standard camelCase naming conventions. 🏁 Scripts executedThe following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: #!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining instances of "Usage" in UI text
rg -i "Usage" --type jsx --type tsx
Length of output: 63 Script: #!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining instances of "Usage" in all files
rg -i "usage" --type js --type jsx --type ts --type tsx -g '!node_modules' -g '!dist' -g '!build'
Length of output: 125 Script: #!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining instances of "Usage" in all files using plain ripgrep
rg -i "usage" -g '*.{js,jsx,ts,tsx}' -g '!node_modules' -g '!dist' -g '!build'
Length of output: 7675 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? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
Describe your changes
Minor UI change(text update) from
Usage->usagein Memory and CPU category for maintaining wording consistency.Issue number
Fixes the Issue #1350
Please ensure all items are checked off before requesting a review: