docs: clarify Firebase Cloud Functions coexistence

[Ibochkarev]

🔗 Linked issue

fixes #1497

📚 Description

The Firebase deploy page only showed firebase deploy --only, so it sounded like other Cloud Functions could not live next to Nuxt. Firebase already supports multiple function sources with codebase.

I updated the Other Cloud Functions section with a multi-source firebase.json example, a link to Firebase's monorepo docs, and --only examples for both the nuxt codebase and a single-source setup.

[vercel]

@Ibochkarev is attempting to deploy a commit to the Nuxt Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 144189db-e533-4a3c-a0ee-363d0cf81bdd

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d41604b and a566513.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• content/deploy/firebase.md

Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 2 included reviews per hour; 0 remain after this review.

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Updated Firebase deployment guidance for Nuxt applications. The documentation covers coexistence with other Cloud Functions, separate function sources with distinct codebase values, deployment of the nuxt codebase with hosting, and targeting functions:server when using one source.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~5 minutes

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to a5665

This documentation-only change clarifies how Nuxt can coexist with multiple Firebase Cloud Function sources; no actionable merge-blocking risk remains after normal checks and review.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
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.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and concisely describes the documentation change about coexistence of Firebase Cloud Functions.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description accurately explains the documentation updates for multiple Firebase function sources and deployment commands.

✨ Finishing Touches 💡 1

🛠️ Fix failing CI checks 💡

• Create stacked PR
• Commit on current branch

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

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

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

Inline comments:
In `@content/deploy/firebase.md`:
- Around line 167-169: Update the Firebase deployment guidance around the single
`functions` configuration entry to explain that deletion warnings depend on
shared `codebase` identifiers, not source count alone. Clarify that a single
source with a unique codebase can coexist with other functions, then document
the multi-source configuration and require distinct codebase values across
separate repository configurations.

🪄 Autofix

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

• Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
• Create a new PR with the fixes

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 25290dff-0a7b-4bae-8ed0-9fbe72b2cab8

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 29e59bb and d41604b.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• content/deploy/firebase.md

[nuxt-com-bundle-report]

Production bundle

Comparing 07b36366 with a5665132. Compressed sizes are calculated from the emitted production assets.

Metric	Base (Brotli)	PR (Brotli)	Δ Brotli	Δ gzip
Client JavaScript	2.49 MiB	2.49 MiB	-239 B (-0.0%)	-12 B (-0.0%)
Client CSS	30.1 KiB	30.1 KiB	—	—
Other client assets	339.3 KiB	339.3 KiB	-1 B (-0.0%)	+2 B (+0.0%)
Total client assets	2.85 MiB	2.85 MiB	-240 B (-0.0%)	-10 B (-0.0%)

Largest module increases

Module	Base (Brotli)	PR (Brotli)	Δ Brotli
/app/pages/docs/async-data-chunk-13.js	0 B	177 B	+177 B
/app/pages/blog/async-data-chunk-2.js	0 B	169 B	+169 B
/app/pages/docs/async-data-chunk-12.js	0 B	169 B	+169 B
/app/pages/docs/[version]/errors/async-data-chunk-0.js	0 B	152 B	+152 B
/app/composables/async-data-chunk-28.js	107 B	257 B	+150 B (+140.2%)
/app/pages/deploy/async-data-chunk-4.js	0 B	134 B	+134 B
/app/pages/blog/async-data-chunk-20.js	0 B	125 B	+125 B
/app/pages/enterprise/agencies/async-data-chunk-5.js	0 B	120 B	+120 B
/app/pages/enterprise/agencies/async-data-chunk-7.js	0 B	120 B	+120 B
/app/pages/deploy/async-data-chunk-3.js	0 B	119 B	+119 B

Module values come from Nuxt’s analyzer and are attribution estimates. This workflow is currently report-only.

Workflow run