Document Aspire integration

[mguinness]

Do changes to README automatically reflect in https://www.papercut-smtp.com/?

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Added an Aspire Integration section to the README covering how to use Papercut SMTP with Aspire projects.
  • Includes connection string format, a setup snippet, a complete wiring example, and a note that ports are auto-assigned and exposed via the Aspire dashboard.

_{✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.}

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

Added an "Aspire Integration" section to README.md explaining how to configure and use Papercut SMTP with Aspire projects, including the connection string format, a setup code snippet, and a note about auto-assigned ports exposed via the Aspire dashboard.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Documentation: Aspire Integration Guide README.md	Added new "Aspire Integration" section documenting Papercut SMTP usage with Aspire: connection string format (endpoint=smtp://<host>:<port>), setup snippet using PapercutSmtp integration, example wiring into an Aspire host, and note that ports are auto-assigned and visible in the Aspire dashboard.

Sequence Diagram(s)

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes

• Review the README code snippet for syntax accuracy and compatibility with current Aspire APIs.
• Verify the connection string example (endpoint=smtp://<host>:<port>) and the note about auto-assigned ports are correct and consistent with Papercut SMTP behavior.

Poem

🐇 I hopped into README, tail aflutter,
Found SMTP trails and an Aspire butter,
Ports assigned, a dashboard bright,
I stitched the code by moonlit night —
Hooray, the integration's in sight! 🎉

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title 'Document Aspire integration' accurately describes the main change: adding documentation about Aspire integration to the README.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 487dbe4 and a671572.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• README.md (1 hunks)

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

• README.md

Tip

📝 Customizable high-level summaries are now available in beta!

You can now customize how CodeRabbit generates the high-level summary in your pull requests — including its content, structure, tone, and formatting.

• Provide your own instructions using the high_level_summary_instructions setting.
• Format the summary however you like (bullet lists, tables, multi-section layouts, contributor stats, etc.).
• Use high_level_summary_in_walkthrough to move the summary from the description to the walkthrough section.

Example instruction:

"Divide the high-level summary into five sections:

1. 📝 Description — Summarize the main change in 50–60 words, explaining what was done.
2. 📓 References — List relevant issues, discussions, documentation, or related PRs.
3. 📦 Dependencies & Requirements — Mention any new/updated dependencies, environment variable changes, or configuration updates.
4. 📊 Contributor Summary — Include a Markdown table showing contributions:
   | Contributor | Lines Added | Lines Removed | Files Changed |
5. ✔️ Additional Notes — Add any extra reviewer context.
   Keep each section concise (under 200 words) and use bullet or numbered lists for clarity."

Note: This feature is currently in beta for Pro-tier users, and pricing will be announced later.

---

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 and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)

README.md (2)

71-71: Use markdown heading syntax instead of bold emphasis.

Line 71 uses bold text (**Setup**) but should use markdown heading syntax to maintain consistency with other subsections in the document.

Apply this diff:

- **Setup**
+ ### Setup

This resolves the markdownlint MD036 rule violation.

---

67-85: Aspire Integration section looks good.

The new documentation is clear, well-structured, and provides practical guidance with a working code example. It follows the project's documentation style and avoids version-specific information. Nice addition!

---

Note on your PR question about automatic website updates: The README changes won't automatically sync to https://www.papercut-smtp.com/ unless your deployment pipeline is configured to pull from the repository. You'll want to verify with the maintainers or check your CI/CD setup (.github/workflows/, deployment configs, etc.) to confirm whether the website rebuilds on README updates or if manual deployment steps are needed.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0ad6265 and 487dbe4.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• README.md (1 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

🧠 Learnings (2)

📓 Common learnings

Learnt from: Kissaki
Repo: ChangemakerStudios/Papercut-SMTP PR: 278
File: README.md:32-33
Timestamp: 2024-10-25T16:50:04.096Z
Learning: In future reviews of the Papercut SMTP project, when suggesting changes to the `README.md`, avoid adding version-specific information or mentioning changes between versions. The maintainers prefer to keep the documentation simple and current, with version change details included in commit descriptions.

📚 Learning: 2024-10-25T16:50:04.096Z

Learnt from: Kissaki
Repo: ChangemakerStudios/Papercut-SMTP PR: 278
File: README.md:32-33
Timestamp: 2024-10-25T16:50:04.096Z
Learning: In future reviews of the Papercut SMTP project, when suggesting changes to the `README.md`, avoid adding version-specific information or mentioning changes between versions. The maintainers prefer to keep the documentation simple and current, with version change details included in commit descriptions.

Applied to files:

• README.md

🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.18.1)

README.md

71-71: Emphasis used instead of a heading

(MD036, no-emphasis-as-heading)

[Jaben]

Thanks -- didn't know about the Aspire community nuget for Papercut. Very cool.

[mguinness]

Thanks Jaben, just spreading the word on this great project. Will you be updating papercut-smtp.com on GitHub Pages? I'm looking to link to that from the Aspire Community Toolkit repo.

[mguinness]

@Jaben You're probably pressed for time, but do you think you'll be able to update the GitHub pages site? If you don't have the bandwidth that's fine but let me know either way. Thanks!