refactor: adjust PR Title Check workflow to reduce noise #12373
Conversation
This is accumulating improvements based on lessons learned from executing #12343
BigLep
changed the title
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please update the PR title to match https:/filecoin-project/lotus/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#pr-title-conventions
fix(ci): allow periods in PR title scope
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please update the PR title to match https:/filecoin-project/lotus/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#pr-title-conventions
|
Seems like we found an edge-case in the pr-title-check, where the regex pattern doesn't account/allow for periods (.) in the scope. I pushed a change here: de60b08. To confirm it fixes it. |
|
I think I'd blame the message rather than the regex here, it probably should be something like a bare |
rjan90
changed the title
github-actions
bot
dismissed
their stale review
PR title now matches the required format.
Allows GitHub to properly register the review, addressing the issue where the review wasn't being dismissed despite the PR title being updated.
github-actions
bot
dismissed
their stale review
PR title now matches the required format.
PR title check workflow to dismiss review only on title edit
rjan90
changed the title
|
@BigLep Sorry that I kind of hijacked this PR to refactor the PR Title Check workflow to reduce noise, as I got bothered by it when working on the UPDATE_RELEASE_FLOW draft PR: #12322. In hindsight I should have opened a separate PR for this, but the monday "jetlag" got the better of me! I will open a new PR for accumulating improvements based on lessons learned from executing #12343 once this lands. |
That's fare. I'll adjust to |
No problem - I'll create a new PR with the release issue improvements. (I now need to also add the change to doing "docs(release): ..." |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
While we're here, how about we remove "synchronize" from line 5. Pushing commits shouldn't need to trigger this workflow.
Also, given we've done a few rounds of tweaking this, I'm wondering if we would have been better off going with something off the shelf that has already been tweaked...
I agree. What we potentially miss with going with something off the shelf, is the period where both styles are allowed (i.e If we encounter more issues with it, I´m inclined to go with the off the shelf option, just so that we do not spend more time on fixing it. |
The top three tools I saw all allow passing in a custom regex. That said, looking at it more, I don't think other tools meet all our needs. I just added a comment in the original PR: #12340 (comment) So, basically lets hold the course and finish fine tuning this for our needs. Thanks! |
|
New PR for doing the release process improvements: #12378 |
Edited by Orjan:
This PR originally intended to accumulate release flow improvements, but is now repurposed to address issues with the PR Title Check. The current implementation is causing excessive noise on draft PRs, as seen in #12322. This change aims to reduce unnecessary notifications while maintaining the check's functionality.