fix: validate invalid blog post dates

[sameerchore]

Summary

Fix blog date validation during documentation builds.

JavaScript can normalize invalid dates such as 2026-02-30(30 days in feb is incorrect date) into a different valid date instead of rejecting them. This could allow incorrect blog metadata to pass through the build.

This change validates the calendar date and time components before generating blog data. Invalid values now fail with an error that includes the affected file and date value.

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

Bug fix and test improvement.

---

Did you add tests for your changes?

Yes. Tests cover:

• Invalid calendar dates such as 2026-02-30
• One-digit date fields that roll over
• Invalid hour, minute, and second values
• Missing and malformed dates
• Error messages containing the file path and invalid value

---

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

No. Valid blog dates continue to work as before. Dates that were previously accepted and normalized incorrectly are now rejected during the build.

---

The following demonstrates the incorrect blog post date behavior:

Before

After

Invalid dates are rejected with a clear validation error identifying the file and value.

---

If relevant, what needs to be documented once your changes are merged or what have you already documented?

No documentation required.

Use of AI
AI was used during investigation and implementation review. The changes and test results were reviewed locally.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Blog post dates are now validated before publication. Invalid or missing dates produce clear diagnostics instead of being silently converted.
  • Valid dates, including supported end-of-day timestamps, continue to be accepted.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated
webpack-doc-kit	Ready	Preview	Sep 25, 2026 2:43pm UTC

[coderabbitai]

Navigate logical layers of code changes, visualize relationships, and explore their blast radius.

Warning

Review limit reached

Next included review available in 47 minutes.

Check out review usage here.

View limit details

Limit details: You’ve used the included review currently available.

You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository.

Learn how review limits work.

Review configuration:

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Advanced

Run ID: e61bcfd8-fd26-4575-96dd-c6035e0b8c3e

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 10e985d and 7da7888.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• scripts/data/blog.mjs
• tests/data/blog.test.mjs

Walkthrough

readPosts now reads each Markdown source once and passes the parsed date, post path, and source text to normalizeDate. The normalizer checks calendar dates, leap years, and time bounds. It returns valid dates as ISO strings and reports invalid or missing dates with post details. Integration tests cover valid dates, invalid values, and end-of-day timestamps.

Priority: ⬇️ Low

Merge Risk: 🔵 Low · up to 10e98

Blog dates and post order can differ between local and CI builds for quoted timestamps without a timezone. The change is mergeable with that bounded risk understood or corrected.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and concisely describes the main change: validating invalid blog post dates.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 2…
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create a new PR

---

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.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Advanced

Run ID: 18bd59e9-472c-4ce6-8c08-c722f3431188

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 047f2d0 and 10e985d.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• scripts/data/blog.mjs
• tests/data/blog.test.mjs

Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review.

[avivkeller]

Rather than this, can't we just edit the blog posts to have the right dates?

[sameerchore]

Rather than this, can't we just edit the blog posts to have the right dates?

yes true I thought on this ,that dev should write valid blog dates. I just added validation as fallback bcoz invalid dates and incorrect format previously allowed the build to succeed with incorrect data.Now It provides an early, clear error, as I pasted img of before after in decription , If this not still needed I'll work to other area by closing this...

[avivkeller]

This just seems awfully complex for something that (should be, if it were to exist) fairly simple

[sameerchore]

Understood. , if I find any other optimal way I will continue with this ...otherwise avoids adding unnecessary build logic and will close pr , thanks for the feedback.