Skip to content

Conversation

@NathanFlurry
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

Copy link
Member Author

Warning

This pull request is not mergeable via GitHub because a downstack PR is open. Once all requirements are satisfied, merge this PR as a stack on Graphite.
Learn more


How to use the Graphite Merge Queue

Add the label merge-queue to this PR to add it to the merge queue.

You must have a Graphite account in order to use the merge queue. Sign up using this link.

An organization admin has enabled the Graphite Merge Queue in this repository.

Please do not merge from GitHub as this will restart CI on PRs being processed by the merge queue.

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

@claude
Copy link

claude bot commented Jan 14, 2026

PR Review: Update Railway Integration Guide for Serverless

Summary

This PR updates the Railway deployment guide to reflect the serverless architecture changes in RivetKit. The main changes include removing the outdated note about not needing to expose a container port and adding a new "Connect to Rivet" step that requires setting up a custom domain.

✅ Positive Observations

  1. Improved clarity: The new "Connect to Rivet" step provides clear, actionable instructions for connecting Railway to Rivet
  2. Better step organization: Renaming "Verify Deployment" to "Test Your Deployment" is more accurate
  3. Necessary update: Removing the note about port exposure aligns with the serverless architecture changes

📝 Suggestions for Improvement

1. Inconsistent Step Title Pattern

The new step title "Connect to Rivet" doesn't follow the same verb pattern as other steps. Consider:

  • Current: "Connect to Rivet"
  • Suggested: "Connect Rivet to Railway" or "Link Railway to Rivet"

This would match the imperative style of other steps like "Setup Project for Railway", "Deploy to Railway", "Set Environment Variables".

2. Incomplete Final Step

The "Test Your Deployment" step is quite brief compared to the rest of the guide:

Visit your Railway frontend to see everything working.

Consider adding more specific verification steps, similar to the Vercel guide's "Connect and Verify" step. For example:

  • What should users expect to see when visiting their frontend?
  • How can they verify actors are connected?
  • Should they check the Rivet dashboard for confirmation?

3. Missing Context for URL Path

The instruction to append /api/rivet to the Railway domain assumes users understand this routing convention. Consider adding a brief explanation or note about why this path is used, especially since this might vary based on the user's application setup.

4. Consistency with Other Guides

Comparing to the Vercel guide (which has a "Connect and Verify" step), the Railway guide could benefit from:

  • Mentioning the Rivet dashboard location for connection status
  • Providing a success confirmation message
  • Explaining what "Done" accomplishes

5. Link Verification Needed

Line 7 mentions "RivetKit Railway template" but the link is empty (). This should either:

  • Include the actual template URL
  • Remove the link if the template doesn't exist yet
  • Add a TODO comment if the template is planned

🔍 Code Quality Assessment

Strengths:

  • Clear, numbered instructions
  • Appropriate formatting with bold text for UI elements
  • Good use of examples (e.g., my-app.railway.app)

Areas for Enhancement:

  • Step title consistency
  • More detailed verification instructions
  • Better explanation of the /api/rivet path convention

🎯 Testing Considerations

This is documentation-only change, but consider:

  • Having someone unfamiliar with Railway follow these steps to identify any gaps
  • Verifying that the /api/rivet path is correct for all Railway deployments
  • Confirming the networking settings path is accurate in Railway's current UI

🔒 Security & Performance

No security or performance concerns for this documentation change.

📊 Overall Assessment

This is a good update that addresses an important architectural change. The documentation now correctly guides users through the serverless deployment flow. With the minor improvements suggested above, this guide would be even more helpful for new users.

Recommendation: Approve with minor suggestions for enhancement.


Note: This review focuses on improving user experience and documentation clarity. The changes are functionally correct and align with the serverless architecture update.

@graphite-app
Copy link
Contributor

graphite-app bot commented Jan 14, 2026

Merge activity

  • Jan 14, 8:52 PM UTC: NathanFlurry added this pull request to the Graphite merge queue.
  • Jan 14, 8:53 PM UTC: CI is running for this pull request on a draft pull request (#3898) due to your merge queue CI optimization settings.
  • Jan 14, 8:53 PM UTC: Merged by the Graphite merge queue via draft PR: #3898.

@pkg-pr-new
Copy link

pkg-pr-new bot commented Jan 14, 2026

More templates

@rivetkit/cloudflare-workers

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/cloudflare-workers@3897

@rivetkit/db

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/db@3897

@rivetkit/framework-base

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/framework-base@3897

@rivetkit/next-js

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/next-js@3897

@rivetkit/react

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/react@3897

rivetkit

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/rivetkit@3897

@rivetkit/sql-loader

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/sql-loader@3897

@rivetkit/virtual-websocket

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/virtual-websocket@3897

@rivetkit/engine-runner

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/engine-runner@3897

@rivetkit/engine-runner-protocol

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/engine-runner-protocol@3897

commit: 796fab3

@graphite-app graphite-app bot closed this Jan 14, 2026
@graphite-app graphite-app bot deleted the 01-14-doc_update_railway_integration_guide_for_serverless branch January 14, 2026 20:53
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.

2 participants