Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

chore: Update label actions #3807

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Aug 13, 2024
Merged

chore: Update label actions #3807

merged 3 commits into from
Aug 13, 2024

Conversation

tylerjroach
Copy link
Member

Description

  • Renames "pending-response" to "pending-community-response"
  • Adds "pending-maintainer-response" when new community issue opened
  • Removes "pending-maintainer-response" when owner/maintainer comments on issue
  • Adds "pending-maintainer-response" when community comments on issue
  • removes "pending-maintainer-response" when issue is closed

General Checklist

  • Added new tests to cover change, if needed
  • Build succeeds with all target using Swift Package Manager
  • All unit tests pass
  • All integration tests pass
  • Security oriented best practices and standards are followed (e.g. using input sanitization, principle of least privilege, etc)
  • Documentation update for the change if required
  • PR title conforms to conventional commit style
  • New or updated tests include Given When Then inline code documentation and are named accordingly testThing_condition_expectation()
  • If breaking change, documentation/changelog update with migration instructions

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

Copy link
Contributor

API Breakage Report

✅ No Public API Breaking Change detected

@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ jobs:
notify:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
permissions: {}
if: ${{ !github.event.issue.pull_request && !contains(fromJSON('["MEMBER", "OWNER"]'), github.event.comment.author_association) }}
if: ${{ !github.event.issue.pull_request }}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I rather keep this filter to avoid sending notifications for comments from maintainers

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The if statement was moved down to each of the steps

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This notify job only has one step, which just runs the command. Unless i'm blatantly missing something 🤔

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh sorry, correct.

If you all would prefer, I can remove it. I brought this up with the Android team and we decided to remove it because we wanted to still be notified when a maintainer opened a new issue. This ensures everyone is aware of the issue coming in, not just the person that created it.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

But this action is for comments being added to issues, not for issues being opened.
I also very much like not being notified for comments from us :P.
But we can check with the team as well

run: |
gh issue edit $ISSUE_NUMBER --repo $REPOSITORY_NAME --remove-label "pending-community-response"
- name: add pending-maintainer-response when new community comment received
if: ${{ !contains(fromJSON('["MEMBER", "OWNER"]'), github.event.comment.author_association) }}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

IIRC for this filter to work you will need to set your aws-amplify org membership visibility to Public, otherwise the runner won't be able to see it.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is no different than the filter above that was already being used?

Copy link
Member

@sebaland sebaland Aug 12, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, everybody in the Swift team made their membership public in order for this to work. You guys in the Android team will probably need to do the same.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Got it, I don't remember doing this but we can check. We've had this type of filter used in other places and working well, so maybe we had already done that as well.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Cool! I might be mixing things up with the ops metrics lambda needing this permission instead of the GH action 😅
But I do remember it was needed somewhere 😬

Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 12, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 68.52%. Comparing base (00aac42) to head (9411865).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3807      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   68.77%   68.52%   -0.25%     
==========================================
  Files        1080     1080              
  Lines       37608    37608              
==========================================
- Hits        25864    25770      -94     
- Misses      11744    11838      +94     
Flag Coverage Δ
API_plugin_unit_test 68.96% <ø> (-0.04%) ⬇️
AWSPluginsCore 68.56% <ø> (ø)
Amplify 47.57% <ø> (+0.01%) ⬆️
Analytics_plugin_unit_test 84.52% <ø> (ø)
Auth_plugin_unit_test 79.69% <ø> (-0.02%) ⬇️
DataStore_plugin_unit_test 81.23% <ø> (-1.36%) ⬇️
Geo_plugin_unit_test 72.00% <ø> (ø)
Logging_plugin_unit_test 62.95% <ø> (ø)
Predictions_plugin_unit_test 37.32% <ø> (ø)
PushNotifications_plugin_unit_test 86.21% <ø> (ø)
Storage_plugin_unit_test 76.81% <ø> (ø)
unit_tests 68.52% <ø> (-0.25%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

API Breakage Report

✅ No Public API Breaking Change detected

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants