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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Testing PR Size Labelling Workflow #669

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

Testing PR Size Labelling Workflow #669

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

shubham-fyle
Copy link
Contributor

@shubham-fyle shubham-fyle commented Sep 20, 2024 •
edited by coderabbitai bot
Loading

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Introduced an automated labeling system for pull requests based on their size.
    • Added a placeholder HTML file with a structure for future content development.
    • Implemented a new workflow for evaluating rules based on specified inputs.

  • Chores

    • Created a new GitHub Actions workflow for pull request size labeling.
    • Added a YAML configuration file for review request automation with estimated time to review labels.

@coderabbitai coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 20, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Walkthrough

The changes introduce several new GitHub Actions workflows: pr-size.yml for automating pull request labeling based on size, and gitstream.yml for evaluating rules based on input parameters. Additionally, a new HTML file, workflow-test.html, is created with 100 empty <div> elements, which may serve as placeholders for future content. A YAML configuration file, .cm/gitstream.cm, is also added to define automation rules related to review time estimation.

Changes

File Change Summary
.github/workflows/pr-size.yml New workflow added for automating pull request labeling based on size categories.
.github/workflows/gitstream.yml New workflow added for evaluating rules based on specified inputs.
.cm/gitstream.cm New YAML configuration file defining automation rules for review time estimation.
workflow-test.html New HTML file created with 100 empty <div> elements, likely serving as a placeholder.

Possibly related PRs

  • feat: Add GitHub PR Checks Workflow #660: The introduction of a new GitHub Actions workflow for pull request checks is related to the main PR's addition of a workflow for labeling pull requests, as both involve automating processes within GitHub Actions to enhance pull request management.

🐇 In the meadow where bunnies play,
A workflow blooms to brighten the day.
With labels for sizes, neat and clear,
Pull requests now bring us cheer!
A hundred divs await their fate,
A canvas for dreams, oh, isn’t it great? 🌼

Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1d3c2a1 and 6347e32.

Files selected for processing (2)
  • .cm/gitstream.cm (1 hunks)
  • .github/workflows/gitstream.yml (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (5)
.cm/gitstream.cm (2)

1-2: LGTM!

The comment and blank line are informational and do not affect the functionality.

3-17: Verify the estimatedReviewTime function.

The automation workflow logic is correct and follows the YAML syntax. The nested ternary operator is a concise way to set the label color based on the ETR value.

However, the estimatedReviewTime function used to calculate the ETR is not defined in this file. Please ensure that the function is implemented correctly and returns the expected values.

Run the following script to verify the estimatedReviewTime function:

.github/workflows/gitstream.yml (3)

1-47: The workflow structure and setup look good!

The workflow is well-structured and follows the standard GitHub Actions syntax. The use of workflow_dispatch with the required inputs allows for manual triggering of the workflow. The gitStream job is set up correctly to run on an Ubuntu runner, and the "Evaluate Rules" step is properly passing the workflow inputs to the linear-b/gitstream-github-action action.

27-29: Verify if the empty default value for resolver_token is intentional.

The resolver_token input is set as optional with an empty default value. Please verify if this is the intended behavior or if a default value should be provided.

38-38: Clarify the purpose and functionality of the linear-b/gitstream-github-action action.

The workflow is using a third-party action from linear-b/gitstream-github-action. To better understand the workflow's purpose and functionality, please provide a brief explanation of what this action does and how it integrates with the gitStream workflow automation.

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    -- I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    -- Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    -- @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    -- @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    -- @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    -- @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    -- @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    -- @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the size/S Small PR label Sep 20, 2024
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

PR title must start with "fix:", "feat:", "chore:", "refactor", or "test:" (case-insensitive)

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

PR description must contain a link to a ClickUp (case-insensitive)

@github-actions github-actions bot added size/M Medium PR and removed size/S Small PR labels Sep 20, 2024
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

PR title must start with "fix:", "feat:", "chore:", "refactor", or "test:" (case-insensitive)

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

PR description must contain a link to a ClickUp (case-insensitive)

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

Tests Skipped Failures Errors Time
259 0 💤 0 ❌ 0 🔥 44.931s ⏱️

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

Tests Skipped Failures Errors Time
259 0 💤 0 ❌ 0 🔥 43.623s ⏱️

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

PR title must start with "fix:", "feat:", "chore:", "refactor", or "test:" (case-insensitive)

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

PR description must contain a link to a ClickUp (case-insensitive)

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

PR title must start with "fix:", "feat:", "chore:", "refactor", or "test:" (case-insensitive)

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

PR description must contain a link to a ClickUp (case-insensitive)

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

PR title must start with "fix:", "feat:", "chore:", "refactor", or "test:" (case-insensitive)

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

PR description must contain a link to a ClickUp (case-insensitive)

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

Tests Skipped Failures Errors Time
259 0 💤 0 ❌ 0 🔥 48.172s ⏱️

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
size/M Medium PR
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
1 participant
@shubham-fyle