Design: Support for Manipulating PullRequests #778
Labels
design
This task is about creating and discussing a design
Milestone
Comments
This was referenced Apr 23, 2019
wlynch
pushed a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
May 22, 2019
Missing from this change: * Statuses, since this might involve more discussion on the set of statuses that we want to support. * Updating from changes to the raw payloads. Unclear how we want to handle these at the moment. Punting on this for now. First step for supporting tektoncd#778.
3 tasks
wlynch
pushed a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
May 22, 2019
Missing from this change: * Statuses, since this might involve more discussion on the set of statuses that we want to support. * Updating from changes to the raw payloads. Unclear how we want to handle these at the moment. Punting on this for now. First step for supporting tektoncd#778.
wlynch
added a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
May 22, 2019
Missing from this change: * Statuses, since this might involve more discussion on the set of statuses that we want to support. * Updating from changes to the raw payloads. Unclear how we want to handle these at the moment. Punting on this for now. First step for supporting tektoncd#778. Co-authored-by: Dan Lorenc <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Billy Lynch <[email protected]>
wlynch
added a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
May 23, 2019
Missing from this change: * Statuses, since this might involve more discussion on the set of statuses that we want to support. * Updating from changes to the raw payloads. Unclear how we want to handle these at the moment. Punting on this for now. First step for supporting tektoncd#778. Co-authored-by: Dan Lorenc <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Billy Lynch <[email protected]>
bobcatfish
modified the milestones:
Pipelines 0.4 🐱 : Aegean Brackenridge,
Pipelines 0.5 🐱 : <cat name tbd @dlorenc>
wlynch
added a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
May 30, 2019
Missing from this change: * Statuses, since this might involve more discussion on the set of statuses that we want to support. * Updating from changes to the raw payloads. Unclear how we want to handle these at the moment. Punting on this for now. First step for supporting tektoncd#778. Co-authored-by: Dan Lorenc <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Billy Lynch <[email protected]>
wlynch
added a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
May 30, 2019
Missing from this change: * Statuses, since this might involve more discussion on the set of statuses that we want to support. * Updating from changes to the raw payloads. Unclear how we want to handle these at the moment. Punting on this for now. First step for supporting tektoncd#778. Co-authored-by: Dan Lorenc <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Billy Lynch <[email protected]>
wlynch
added a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
May 30, 2019
Missing from this change: * Statuses, since this might involve more discussion on the set of statuses that we want to support. * Updating from changes to the raw payloads. Unclear how we want to handle these at the moment. Punting on this for now. First step for supporting tektoncd#778. Co-authored-by: Dan Lorenc <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Billy Lynch <[email protected]>
wlynch
added a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
May 30, 2019
Missing from this change: * Statuses, since this might involve more discussion on the set of statuses that we want to support. * Updating from changes to the raw payloads. Unclear how we want to handle these at the moment. Punting on this for now. First step for supporting tektoncd#778. Co-authored-by: Dan Lorenc <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Billy Lynch <[email protected]>
wlynch
added a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
Jun 4, 2019
Missing from this change: * Statuses, since this might involve more discussion on the set of statuses that we want to support. * Updating from changes to the raw payloads. Unclear how we want to handle these at the moment. Punting on this for now. First step for supporting tektoncd#778. Co-authored-by: Dan Lorenc <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Billy Lynch <[email protected]>
afrittoli
pushed a commit
to afrittoli/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
Jun 18, 2019
Missing from this change: * Statuses, since this might involve more discussion on the set of statuses that we want to support. * Updating from changes to the raw payloads. Unclear how we want to handle these at the moment. Punting on this for now. First step for supporting tektoncd#778. Co-authored-by: Dan Lorenc <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Billy Lynch <[email protected]>
wlynch
added a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
Jun 19, 2019
Missing from this change: * Statuses, since this might involve more discussion on the set of statuses that we want to support. * Updating from changes to the raw payloads. Unclear how we want to handle these at the moment. Punting on this for now. First step for supporting tektoncd#778. Co-authored-by: Dan Lorenc <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Billy Lynch <[email protected]>
wlynch
added a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
Jun 19, 2019
Missing from this change: * Statuses, since this might involve more discussion on the set of statuses that we want to support. * Updating from changes to the raw payloads. Unclear how we want to handle these at the moment. Punting on this for now. First step for supporting tektoncd#778. Co-authored-by: Dan Lorenc <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Billy Lynch <[email protected]>
tekton-robot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jun 19, 2019
Missing from this change: * Statuses, since this might involve more discussion on the set of statuses that we want to support. * Updating from changes to the raw payloads. Unclear how we want to handle these at the moment. Punting on this for now. First step for supporting #778. Co-authored-by: Dan Lorenc <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Billy Lynch <[email protected]>
wlynch
added a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
Jun 20, 2019
This adds support for the GitHub Status API (https://developer.github.com/v3/repos/statuses/). This accompanies tektoncd#778 and tektoncd#895 to complete initial Pull Request support support for GitHub OAuth.
wlynch
added a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
Jun 20, 2019
This adds support for the GitHub Status API (https://developer.github.com/v3/repos/statuses/). This accompanies tektoncd#778 and tektoncd#895 to complete initial Pull Request support support for GitHub OAuth.
3 tasks
wlynch
added a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
Jun 20, 2019
This adds support for the GitHub Status API (https://developer.github.com/v3/repos/statuses/). This accompanies tektoncd#778 and tektoncd#895 to complete initial Pull Request support support for GitHub OAuth.
|
Especially since this issue is just about design, I think we can close the issue, unless you think otherwise @wlynch ! |
|
SGTM |
wlynch
added a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
Jul 2, 2019
This adds support for the GitHub Status API (https://developer.github.com/v3/repos/statuses/). This accompanies tektoncd#778 and tektoncd#895 to complete initial Pull Request support support for GitHub OAuth.
wlynch
added a commit
to wlynch/pipeline
that referenced
this issue
Jul 2, 2019
This adds support for the GitHub Status API (https://developer.github.com/v3/repos/statuses/). This accompanies tektoncd#778 and tektoncd#895 to complete initial Pull Request support support for GitHub OAuth.
tekton-robot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 3, 2019
This adds support for the GitHub Status API (https://developer.github.com/v3/repos/statuses/). This accompanies #778 and #895 to complete initial Pull Request support support for GitHub OAuth.
|
This has been implemented! (Thanks @wlynch !! 🎉 ) |
pradeepitm12
pushed a commit
to openshift/tektoncd-pipeline
that referenced
this issue
Jan 27, 2021
This commit adds two new types for InterceptorRequest and InterceptorResponse. Instead of just forwarding the incoming request, EventListeners will use these types to send requests to interceptors. This commit introduces an `extensions` field where Interceptors can add additional data that is available to TriggerBindings. This replaces the previous mechanism where Interceptors could freely modify the input bodies. With this change, the input bodies are immutable, and any extra fields added by Interceptors can only be done within the `extensions` field. This commit simply adds the new interface types and plumbing. Future commits will change the Interceptors to adopt the new Interface. Part of #271 and tektoncd#778 Signed-off-by: Dibyo Mukherjee <[email protected]>
pradeepitm12
pushed a commit
to openshift/tektoncd-pipeline
that referenced
this issue
Jan 27, 2021
This commit migrates the GitHub, GitLab, BitBucket interceptors to use the new InterceptorRequest/Response types. Since these interceptors do not modify the event body, this change is not a breaking change. In addition, this commit also refactors the tests for the interceptors by splitting valid and invalid scenarios into separate test cases. Part of #271 and tektoncd#778 Signed-off-by: Dibyo Mukherjee <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Expected Behavior
Task/Runs should be able to declaratively manipulate PullRequests (across SCM providers), similarly to how they can manipulate Images, k8s Clusters, and the other PipelineResources.
Actual Behavior
This is not possible today.
Additional Info
Potential Design Document/PRD: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MXy-AOZmrgNusX710MgeERin_RkjNhnl0P5e5-ROhuc/edit (shared with [email protected])
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: