ci: bump RAINIX_SHA to dbcd9d3 (rustfmt virtual workspace root)

[thedavidmeister]

Bumps the pinned RAINIX_SHA in all 13 reusable workflows from 64c884b9 to dbcd9d3, so consumers resolve the rust-shell built from #363.

Without this, #363's hook fix is inert: rainix-rs-static.yaml runs nix develop github:rainlanguage/rainix/${{ env.RAINIX_SHA }}#rust-shell -c pre-commit run --all-files, which at 64c884b9 is still the hook that exits Failed to find targets on a virtual workspace root. rainlanguage/rain.metadata stays red on rs-static, and its ci-gate keeps refusing to publish.

QA

• Discriminating tests: n/a - a pin bump has no behaviour of its own to test. What it is verified against is fix(pre-commit): rustfmt a virtual workspace root #363, whose fix this makes reachable, and rain.metadata's rs-static lane going green once this lands.
• Mutations applied: n/a - the diff is one literal repeated across 13 workflow files, with no branch or condition to mutate. The one failure mode is a partial bump, which feat(ci): assert all rainix-*.yaml reusables share one pinned RAINIX_SHA #252's proposed consistency check targets; guarded here by grep -rh 'RAINIX_SHA: ' .github/workflows/ | sort -u returning exactly one line.
• Oracle: git rev-parse origin/main = dbcd9d3cf55da4c40e42519b320cea8bdcd9a193, the merge commit of fix(pre-commit): rustfmt a virtual workspace root #363, and the existing bump commits (210e3358, 8c9af7c0, cf3b6826, 9744637f) which set the same key in the same 13 files.
• Category check: Refs fix(pre-commit): rustfmt a virtual workspace root #363 - that PR asks for the hook to stop failing on a virtual workspace root; this delivers the half that makes it reach consumers. No other behaviour is in scope.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

Next included review available in 47 minutes.

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: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: a528cdba-77de-4075-a17b-8125084a519b

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between dbcd9d3 and 5215a9c.

📒 Files selected for processing (13)

• .github/workflows/rainix-autopublish.yaml
• .github/workflows/rainix-copy-artifacts.yaml
• .github/workflows/rainix-manual-sol-artifacts.yaml
• .github/workflows/rainix-manual-sol-verify.yaml
• .github/workflows/rainix-rs-static.yaml
• .github/workflows/rainix-rs-test.yaml
• .github/workflows/rainix-rs-wasm-test.yaml
• .github/workflows/rainix-rs-wasm.yaml
• .github/workflows/rainix-sol-legal.yaml
• .github/workflows/rainix-sol-static.yaml
• .github/workflows/rainix-sol-test.yaml
• .github/workflows/rainix-subgraph-test.yaml
• .github/workflows/rainix-tag-release.yaml

---

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.}

[github-actions]

@coderabbitai assess this PR size classification for the totality of the PR with the following criterias and report it in your comment:

S/M/L PR Classification Guidelines:

This guide helps classify merged pull requests by effort and complexity rather than just line count. The goal is to assess the difficulty and scope of changes after they have been completed.

Small (S)

Characteristics:

• Simple bug fixes, typos, or minor refactoring
• Single-purpose changes affecting 1-2 files
• Documentation updates
• Configuration tweaks
• Changes that require minimal context to review

Review Effort: Would have taken 5-10 minutes

Examples:

• Fix typo in variable name
• Update README with new instructions
• Adjust configuration values
• Simple one-line bug fixes
• Import statement cleanup

Medium (M)

Characteristics:

• Feature additions or enhancements
• Refactoring that touches multiple files but maintains existing behavior
• Breaking changes with backward compatibility
• Changes requiring some domain knowledge to review

Review Effort: Would have taken 15-30 minutes

Examples:

• Add new feature or component
• Refactor common utility functions
• Update dependencies with minor breaking changes
• Add new component with tests
• Performance optimizations
• More complex bug fixes

Large (L)

Characteristics:

• Major feature implementations
• Breaking changes or API redesigns
• Complex refactoring across multiple modules
• New architectural patterns or significant design changes
• Changes requiring deep context and multiple review rounds

Review Effort: Would have taken 45+ minutes

Examples:

• Complete new feature with frontend/backend changes
• Protocol upgrades or breaking changes
• Major architectural refactoring
• Framework or technology upgrades

Additional Factors to Consider

When deciding between sizes, also consider:

• Test coverage impact: More comprehensive test changes lean toward larger classification
• Risk level: Changes to critical systems bump up a size category
• Team familiarity: Novel patterns or technologies increase complexity

Notes:

• the assessment must be for the totality of the PR, that means comparing the base branch to the last commit of the PR
• the assessment output must be exactly one of: S, M or L (single-line comment) in format of: SIZE={S/M/L}
• do not include any additional text, only the size classification
• your assessment comment must not include tips or additional sections
• do NOT tag me or anyone else on your comment