Add GitHub action for auto-requesting code owner reviews. #3471
Conversation
|
I am not very familiar with GH Actions and find it challenging to test. I would appreciate reviews from those with more experience. It would also be helpful if you could test it yourself. Or just use it as an inspiration for a proper solution. |
Codecov ReportAll modified lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3471 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 20.29% 20.29%
=======================================
Files 198 198
Lines 45268 45268
=======================================
+ Hits 9188 9189 +1
+ Misses 35396 35395 -1
Partials 684 684 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
OhmSpectator
force-pushed
the
feature/auto-request-codeowners-review
branch
from
082eb8e to
dc36222
Compare
|
Fixed the Yetus checks. |
|
I was thinking this is the default behavior of the GitHub, when codewners file is filled in. What's new in the behavior? |
@rouming , it handles the code owners without write permissions. I've mentioned it in the commit message |
| reviewers_cleaned=${reviewers//@/} | ||
| reviewers_comma_separated=$(echo "$reviewers_cleaned" | tr ' ' ',') | ||
| echo "Requesting review from: $reviewers_comma_separated" | ||
| #echo gh pr edit ${{ github.event.pull_request.number }} --add-reviewer $reviewers_comma_separated |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
commented code, is that intentional?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ooops, nope. That's how I tested it. Will fix.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
FWIW way I test GHA is i create fork and enable workflows there, for small actions it'll do :)
OhmSpectator
force-pushed
the
feature/auto-request-codeowners-review
branch
from
dc36222 to
b60ef7c
Compare
|
FYI @europaul |
|
@OhmSpectator you can use https://github.com/nektos/act to test the GH action. I'm not a big fan of it, because it usually fails on not having access to the right secrets, but here you can use your own GitHub tocken, so I think it should work fine |
Thanks! I'll take a look! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, as long as @OhmSpectator tested it either way and it worked :)
Youth and rage! Be a rebel! Merge into master without tests! Just kidding... I will try the approach proposed by @europaul later when I have time. |
…ews. This new GitHub Action automatically requests reviews from code owners when a pull request is opened or updated. It fetches the necessary number of commits related to the PR and identifies the appropriate code owners based on the changed files. This is particularly useful as most of the code owners do not have write access to the repository, and thus are not automatically assigned by GitHub. Signed-off-by: Nikolay Martyanov <nikolay@zededa.com>
OhmSpectator
force-pushed
the
feature/auto-request-codeowners-review
branch
from
b60ef7c to
7b14d83
Compare
|
I've tested it with the |
|
I suggest we merge it and see how it works with our real PRs. Since it does not touch any dangerous functionality, we can afford to test it under real conditions. |
I agree 👍 |
This new GitHub Action automatically requests reviews from code owners when a pull request is opened or updated. It fetches the necessary number of commits related to the PR and identifies the appropriate code owners based on the changed files. This is particularly useful as most of the code owners do not have write access to the repository, and thus are not automatically assigned by GitHub.