[davlgd]

📝 Summary

This PR reworks the Pulsar pages from the behavior of the add-on. Code and behavior checked: each command and example was run on the platform, with pulsarctl, the admin API of Pulsar, the Clever Cloud API, and the Python, Java, and Rust clients.

• The Rust example uses Magnetar, added to the Vale vocabulary
• The environment variables reference describes the Pulsar variables as the add-on sets them
• Eclipse Biscuit is named at its first mention, with a link to its documentation, on the pages that use it

🧪 Type of Change

• ⚠️ Bug fix
• 📅 Changelog update
• 📚 Documentation update
• ✨ New content/feature
• 🔧 Technical/maintenance

✅ Validation

• Read the contributing guidelines
• Verify content accuracy and links
• Run relevant checks and builds
• Check the rendered result when the change affects layout or formatting

[github-actions]

👋` Review app deleted

You closed this PR and deleted the review app.

[Copilot]

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has insufficient remaining quota. Try requesting a review at a lower effort level.

An organization owner can choose the repository organization as the billing source for reviews requested by members with a paid Copilot license. Learn about Copilot code review billing.

[Copilot]

🟡 Changes recommended

The Pulsar setup examples use an unquoted <addon-id> placeholder that the shell interprets as redirections, causing the commands to fail before environment variables can be loaded.

1 open issue

• Replace unquoted addon placeholder with a shell-safe example ID · New

_{Review effort: Balanced}

[Copilot]

🟡 Changes recommended

The replay guidance links to reader examples that leave the durable DLQ backlog intact and needs to distinguish inspection from draining with a consumer that acknowledges each message.

1 open issue

• Clarify that inspecting DLQ messages with a reader does not drain them · New

1 resolved since last review

• Replace unquoted addon placeholder with a shell-safe example ID

_{Review effort: Balanced}

[Copilot]

🔵 Needs a closer look

Platform-maintainer confirmation is needed for storage-policy PATCH semantics, deletion delays, and token lifetime/revocation guarantees that cannot be verified from the available sources.

No open issues 🎉

1 resolved since last review

• Clarify that inspecting DLQ messages with a reader does not drain them

_{Review effort: Balanced}

[Copilot]

🟡 Changes recommended

The documentation must clarify that --add-ttl 1h is not a hard access cutoff, since already-authorized producers and consumers can retain access after expiry until disconnection or another permission check.

1 open issue

• Clarify TTL does not revoke existing sessions · New

_{Review effort: Balanced}

[Copilot]

🔵 Needs a closer look

Platform-owner verification is needed because the checkout lacks implementation or API contracts to validate data-loss-sensitive storage-policy PATCH omission/reset semantics and delayed namespace/Cellar deletion offline.

No open issues 🎉

1 resolved since last review

• Clarify TTL does not revoke existing sessions

_{Review effort: Balanced}