Check collaborator status for users

[gentlementlegen]

          ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/3b7feaa1-ada6-4a6f-975d-554825644aa9)

@gentlementlegen he's a collaborator this error should not have been thrown

Originally posted by @0x4007 in ubiquity/business-development#106 (comment)

What happened

The user was recognized as member instead of collaborator, thus not being able to start the task.

What was expected

The user should have been recognized as collaborator and start the task.

[ubiquity-os-beta]

Note

The following contributors may be suitable for this task:

gentlementlegen

76% Match ubiquity-os-marketplace/text-conversation-rewards#214

[ubiquity-os-beta]

@gentlementlegen the deadline is at Sat, Dec 28, 11:31 AM UTC

[ubiquity-os-beta]

Important

• Be sure to link a pull-request before the first reminder to avoid disqualification.
• Reminders will be sent every 7 days if there is no activity.
• Assignees will be disqualified after 14 days of inactivity.

[gentlementlegen]

@0x4007 So what happens here is that before we only checked for organization memberships. In the repo, the user only has outside collaborator access on this specific repo.

I added the retrieval of the role for the user in the repo, but it looks different from the organization one, and looks like the following:

{                                                                                                                                              
             "user": "ubiquity-ubiquibot",                                                                                                                
             "owner": "Meniole",                                                                                                                          
             "repo": "command-start-stop",
             "data": {
               "permission": "write",
               "user": {
                 "login": "ubiquity-ubiquibot",
                 ...
                 "type": "User",
                 "user_view_type": "public",
                 "site_admin": false,
                 "permissions": {
                   "admin": false,
                   "maintain": false,
                   "push": true,
                   "triage": true,
                   "pull": true
                 },
                 "role_name": "write"
               },
               "role_name": "write"
             }
}

The role_name: write corresponds to the role in the given repo, as seen in your screenshot. I think the best option is to add these in the roles. Possible options are: admin, write, read, none.

[0x4007]

I think any of the options technically means they are added as a "core team member." Possibly exclude none if that means they weren't added as a collaborator.

I'm assuming you are missing triage and maintain from your enum:

[gentlementlegen]

@0x4007 technically these roles can be infinite because you can add custom ones, but sure I can add them.

[0x4007]

So then you should consider any value as a "core team member" but none is unclear to me what exactly that represents.

[gentlementlegen]

read is for external contributors as well (it is the default role).

Quoting the docs

Get repository permissions for a user
Checks the repository permission of a collaborator. The possible repository permissions are admin, write, read, and none.

Note: The permission attribute provides the legacy base roles of admin, write, read, and none, where the maintain role is mapped to write and the triage role is mapped to read. To determine the role assigned to the collaborator, see the role_name attribute, which will provide the full role name, including custom roles. The permissions hash can also be used to determine which base level of access the collaborator has to the repository.

[ubiquity-os-beta]

+ Evaluating results. Please wait...

[ubiquity-os-beta]

 [ 158.92 WXDAI ] 

@gentlementlegen

Contributions Overview

View	Contribution	Count	Reward
Issue	Task	1	100
Issue	Specification	1	58.92

Conversation Incentives

Comment	Formatting	Relevance	Priority	Reward
![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/3b7feaa1-ada…	14.73 content: content: p: score: 0 elementCount: 5 img: score: 5 elementCount: 1 em: score: 0 elementCount: 1 h2: score: 1 elementCount: 2 a: score: 5 elementCount: 1 result: 12 regex: wordCount: 49 wordValue: 0.1 result: 2.73	1	4	58.92

 [ 27.816 WXDAI ] 

@0x4007

Contributions Overview

View	Contribution	Count	Reward
Issue	Comment	2	27.16
Review	Comment	2	0.656

Conversation Incentives

Comment	Formatting	Relevance	Priority	Reward
I think any of the options technically means they are added as a…	7.49 content: content: p: score: 0 elementCount: 3 a: score: 5 elementCount: 1 result: 5 regex: wordCount: 44 wordValue: 0.1 result: 2.49	0.8	4	23.968
So then you should consider any value as a "core team member" bu…	1.33 content: content: p: score: 0 elementCount: 1 result: 0 regex: wordCount: 21 wordValue: 0.1 result: 1.33	0.6	4	3.192
@gentlementlegen will you be able to prioritize this？	0.59 content: content: p: score: 0 elementCount: 1 result: 0 regex: wordCount: 8 wordValue: 0.1 result: 0.59	0.2	4	0.472
That sounds like a good plan.	0.46 content: content: p: score: 0 elementCount: 1 result: 0 regex: wordCount: 6 wordValue: 0.1 result: 0.46	0.1	4	0.184

 [ 4.9 WXDAI ] 

@whilefoo

Contributions Overview

View	Contribution	Count	Reward
Review	Comment	1	4.9

Conversation Incentives

Comment	Formatting	Relevance	Priority	Reward
I'm fine with the changes, my only concern is that we will have …	1.75 content: content: p: score: 0 elementCount: 1 result: 0 regex: wordCount: 29 wordValue: 0.1 result: 1.75	0.7	4	4.9