Conversation
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughMigrates ESLint to a flat config, bumps Expo/React/React Native/TypeScript versions, updates Android SDK fallbacks, raises Swift to 5.9, renames Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~22 minutes Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 1 | ❌ 2❌ Failed checks (2 warnings)
✅ Passed checks (1 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
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. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
package.json (1)
43-47: Overly permissivepeerDependencieswildcards provide no compatibility guidance.Widening all three to
*means package managers will never warn consumers about version mismatches. This library depends on Expo 54, React 19, and RN 0.81+ APIs — a consumer running React 18 or RN 0.76 will silently receive no conflict signal. Consider constraining to at minimum the lowest major version known to work:📦 Suggested tighter peer range
"peerDependencies": { - "expo": "*", - "react": "*", - "react-native": "*" + "expo": ">=54.0.0", + "react": ">=19.0.0", + "react-native": ">=0.81.0" }🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@package.json` around lines 43 - 47, The peerDependencies are too permissive ("*") for "expo", "react", and "react-native"; update the package.json peerDependencies to use constrained semver ranges that reflect the versions you support (e.g., set "expo" to a minimum of 54 like "^54.0.0", "react" to "^19.0.0", and "react-native" to a 0.81+ range such as ">=0.81.0 <0.82.0" or another appropriate range), replacing the "*" entries for expo/react/react-native so package managers will warn on incompatible consumer versions.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@android/build.gradle`:
- Around line 26-29: The change raises Android API usage: compileSdkVersion and
targetSdkVersion are set to 36 while minSdkVersion is bumped to 24; update the
release notes/changelog to explicitly call out this breaking change
(minSdkVersion 21→24) so consumers know Lollipop/Marshmallow apps will fail to
build, mark the release as a major bump, and include migration guidance (e.g.,
keep host app minSdk ≥24 or pin an older library version) and the exact symbols
affected (compileSdkVersion, targetSdkVersion, minSdkVersion) so maintainers and
integrators can quickly identify the impact.
In `@example/App.tsx`:
- Line 20: The App currently uses SafeAreaView without a SafeAreaProvider; wrap
your app root with SafeAreaProvider so SafeAreaView can read inset
context—either add <SafeAreaProvider> around SafeAreaView inside the App
component (locate the App function and SafeAreaView usage) or wrap the rendered
<App /> in index.ts with SafeAreaProvider; ensure you import SafeAreaProvider
from 'react-native-safe-area-context' and remove duplicate providers if any.
---
Nitpick comments:
In `@package.json`:
- Around line 43-47: The peerDependencies are too permissive ("*") for "expo",
"react", and "react-native"; update the package.json peerDependencies to use
constrained semver ranges that reflect the versions you support (e.g., set
"expo" to a minimum of 54 like "^54.0.0", "react" to "^19.0.0", and
"react-native" to a 0.81+ range such as ">=0.81.0 <0.82.0" or another
appropriate range), replacing the "*" entries for expo/react/react-native so
package managers will warn on incompatible consumer versions.
pchalupa
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 21, 2026
Bump swift version Bump android sdk version Rename platform Upgrade example Migrate to flat eslint config Migrate to safe area context Add context provider
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Related Issues
I have tested my change on
iOS
Android
📦 Published PR as canary version:
1.0.0--canary.35.42713b3.0✨ Test out this PR locally via:
npm install expo-text-extractor@1.0.0--canary.35.42713b3.0 # or yarn add expo-text-extractor@1.0.0--canary.35.42713b3.0Summary by CodeRabbit
Dependencies
Build & Platform Support
User Experience
Chores