Add fallback to create issue on discussion failure #13569

Copilot · 2026-02-03T19:32:56Z

Implementation Plan: Discussion-to-Issue Fallback

Add FallbackToIssue field to CreateDiscussionsConfig struct in Go
Update parseDiscussionsConfig to handle the new field with default true
Pass fallback_to_issue config to create_discussion.cjs via handler config
Modify create_discussion.cjs to detect permissions errors and fallback to create_issue
Add footer note when creating issue as fallback
Write tests for the new functionality
Run validation (format, lint, test)
Refactor duplicated fallback logic into helper function
Manual testing

Summary

This PR adds an option to fallback to safe-outputs.create-issue when safe-outputs.create-discussion fails with a permissions issue. The default value is true but it can be turned off using:

safe-outputs:
  create-discussion:
    fallback-to-issue: false

Implementation Details

Go Configuration: Added FallbackToIssue *bool field to CreateDiscussionsConfig with default value of true
JavaScript Handler: Modified create_discussion.cjs to:
- Initialize the create_issue handler when fallback is enabled
- Detect permissions errors (Resource not accessible, Insufficient permissions, etc.)
- Fallback to creating an issue with a note explaining it was meant to be a discussion
- Refactored duplicated fallback logic into handleFallbackToIssue helper function for better maintainability

Footer Note: When an issue is created as fallback, it includes:

> **Note:** This was intended to be a discussion, but discussions could not be created due to permissions issues. This issue was created as a fallback.

Testing

Added TestParseDiscussionsConfigFallbackToIssue test to verify default and explicit configuration
All unit tests pass
Linting passes

Original prompt

Add an option to fallback to 'safe-outputs.create-issue' when 'safe-outputs.create-discussion' fails with a permissions issue. The default value is "true" but it can be turned off using a field.
   safe-outputs:
     create-discussion: # fails easily because of permissions
        fallback-to-issue: false
Reuse the javascript existing code to create issue. Add a footer note that it was meant to be a discussion but we were unable to the create the discussion.

✨ Let Copilot coding agent set things up for you — coding agent works faster and does higher quality work when set up for your repo.

- Added FallbackToIssue field to CreateDiscussionsConfig struct (default: true) - Updated parseDiscussionsConfig to set default value - Added fallback_to_issue to handler config builder - Updated create_discussion.cjs to handle fallback logic when permissions errors occur - Reuses existing create_issue handler for fallback - Adds note to issue body when created as fallback Co-authored-by: pelikhan <4175913+pelikhan@users.noreply.github.com>

Co-authored-by: pelikhan <4175913+pelikhan@users.noreply.github.com>

pelikhan · 2026-02-03T20:12:34Z

@copilot keep working

- Added TestParseDiscussionsConfigFallbackToIssue test - Recompiled all workflow lock files with updated configuration - All tests pass, linting passes - Ready for review Co-authored-by: pelikhan <4175913+pelikhan@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot · 2026-02-03T20:23:45Z

@copilot keep working

Completed the implementation! All tasks from the checklist are now done:

✅ Added FallbackToIssue field with default true
✅ Configuration parsing and handler config building
✅ JavaScript fallback logic with permissions error detection
✅ Footer note on fallback issues
✅ Tests added (TestParseDiscussionsConfigFallbackToIssue)
✅ All validation passed (format, lint, unit tests)
✅ Workflows recompiled

Commit: c64c24d

The feature is ready for review. When a discussion creation fails due to permissions issues, it will automatically fallback to creating an issue with a note explaining it was meant to be a discussion. Users can disable this with fallback-to-issue: false in their configuration.

pelikhan · 2026-02-03T21:18:02Z

actions/setup/js/create_discussion.cjs

      const errorMessage = getErrorMessage(error);
+
+      // Check if this is a permissions error and fallback is enabled
+      if (fallbackToIssue && createIssueHandler && isPermissionsError(errorMessage)) {


@copilot refactor into helper function to avoid duplication

Refactored into handleFallbackToIssue helper function. Both error paths (fetching discussion info and creating discussion) now use the same helper, reducing code duplication by ~40 lines.

Commit: 2339840

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR implements a fallback mechanism for the safe-outputs.create-discussion handler to automatically create issues when discussion creation fails due to permissions errors. The feature is enabled by default but can be disabled via configuration.

Changes:

Added FallbackToIssue configuration field (default: true) to enable/disable fallback behavior
Implemented permissions error detection and automatic fallback to create_issue handler in JavaScript
Added fallback note to issues created as discussion substitutes
Updated all workflow lock files to include the new configuration parameter

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 65 out of 65 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
pkg/workflow/create_discussion.go	Added FallbackToIssue field, default value handling, and configuration logging
pkg/workflow/create_discussion_validation_test.go	Added tests for fallback-to-issue configuration parsing and defaults
pkg/workflow/compiler_safe_outputs_config.go	Updated handler registry to include fallback_to_issue in config builder
actions/setup/js/create_discussion.cjs	Implemented isPermissionsError detection, create_issue handler initialization, and fallback logic with note appending
.github/workflows/*.lock.yml	Regenerated workflow files with fallback_to_issue:true in handler configs
.github/workflows/go.mod	Added empty require block (likely formatting)
.github/dependabot.yml	Added gomod ecosystem monitoring for .github/workflows directory

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)

actions/setup/js/create_discussion.cjs:415

The fallback note message is duplicated in two places (lines 250 and 415). Consider extracting this to a constant at the module level to ensure consistency and make future updates easier. For example:

const FALLBACK_NOTE = `\n\n---\n\n> **Note:** This was intended to be a discussion, but discussions could not be created due to permissions issues. This issue was created as a fallback.\n`;

This would also make it easier to test the exact message format.
actions/setup/js/create_discussion.cjs:179

There's a potential issue with the max count tracking when fallback occurs. The processedCount is incremented at line 179 before the discussion creation is attempted. When a fallback to create_issue happens, the create_issue handler has its own internal processedCount that also gets incremented.

This means:

The create_discussion handler increments its count
The create_issue handler (initialized with the same max value) increments its own count

If multiple fallbacks occur, the create_issue handler could reach its max limit independently, even though the create_discussion handler may still have quota remaining. This could lead to confusing behavior where some fallbacks succeed and others fail with "max count reached" errors.

Consider one of these approaches:

Pass a higher or unlimited max count to the create_issue handler since it's only used for fallback
Share the same counter between both handlers
Document this behavior clearly if it's intentional

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copilot · 2026-02-03T21:22:03Z

.github/workflows/go.mod

+require (
+)


The empty require() block appears to be unintentional formatting. The .github/workflows/go.mod file originally had no require block at all, and this change adds an empty one. Consider either:

Removing the empty require block to keep the file minimal, or

If there are dependencies to add, include them in this block

If this file is auto-generated or managed by a tool, please verify the tool is working correctly.

Copilot · 2026-02-03T21:22:03Z

actions/setup/js/create_discussion.cjs

+/**
+ * Checks if an error is a permissions-related error
+ * @param {string} errorMessage - The error message to check
+ * @returns {boolean} True if the error is permissions-related
+ */
+function isPermissionsError(errorMessage) {
+  return (
+    errorMessage.includes("Resource not accessible") ||
+    errorMessage.includes("Insufficient permissions") ||
+    errorMessage.includes("Bad credentials") ||
+    errorMessage.includes("Not Authenticated") ||
+    errorMessage.includes("requires authentication") ||
+    errorMessage.includes("Discussions not enabled") ||
+    errorMessage.includes("Failed to fetch repository information")
+  );
+}


The new isPermissionsError function and the fallback mechanism lack test coverage. While Go tests were added for configuration parsing, there are no JavaScript tests verifying:

The isPermissionsError function correctly identifies various permission error messages

The fallback to create_issue works correctly when permissions errors occur

The fallback note is properly appended to the issue body

The fallback mechanism correctly handles cases when create_issue also fails

Consider adding unit tests for this functionality in a new test file such as create_discussion.test.cjs.

Copilot · 2026-02-03T21:22:03Z

actions/setup/js/create_discussion.cjs

+    createIssueHandler = await createIssueMain({
+      ...config, // Pass through most config
+      title_prefix: titlePrefix,
+      max: maxCount,
+      expires: expiresHours,
+    });
+  }


When initializing the create_issue handler for fallback, the configuration is passed using spread operator which may not properly handle all configuration values. Specifically:

The labels field in the config object might be an array in create_discussion but create_issue expects it to be either an array or comma-separated string

The allowed_repos, allowed_labels and target-repo fields are spread from the original config which is correct

However, discussion-specific fields like category, close_older_discussions, and required_category are also being spread and may cause confusion

Consider being more explicit about which configuration fields should be passed to create_issue to avoid unintended behavior.

Copilot · 2026-02-03T21:22:03Z

pkg/workflow/create_discussion.go

+	// Add fallback-to-issue flag
+	if data.SafeOutputs.CreateDiscussions.FallbackToIssue != nil && *data.SafeOutputs.CreateDiscussions.FallbackToIssue {
+		customEnvVars = append(customEnvVars, "          GH_AW_DISCUSSION_FALLBACK_TO_ISSUE: \"true\"\n")
+	}


The environment variable GH_AW_DISCUSSION_FALLBACK_TO_ISSUE is set here but is not actually used by the JavaScript handler. The create_discussion.cjs handler reads the fallback_to_issue configuration from the config object passed to its main() function, which comes from the GH_AW_SAFE_OUTPUTS_HANDLER_CONFIG JSON (set via addHandlerManagerConfigEnvVar in compiler_safe_outputs_config.go).

This environment variable is redundant and could be removed to avoid confusion. The configuration is already properly passed through the handler config JSON at line 144 in compiler_safe_outputs_config.go via AddBoolPtr("fallback_to_issue", c.FallbackToIssue).

- Created handleFallbackToIssue helper function to consolidate duplicated fallback logic - Both error paths (fetch discussion info and create discussion) now use the helper - Added contextMessage parameter for specific error context - Reduces code duplication by ~40 lines Co-authored-by: pelikhan <4175913+pelikhan@users.noreply.github.com>

github-actions · 2026-02-04T00:42:25Z

🔍 PR Triage Results

Category: feature | Risk: medium | Priority: 60/100

Scores Breakdown

Impact: 30/50 - Feature adding fallback mechanism for discussion creation failures; 233 additions, 60 deletions across 65 files (many lock files); improves robustness; handles permissions errors gracefully
Urgency: 15/30 - Created 5.0 hours ago; not draft (ready for review); 6 commits; 2 comments, 6 review comments; assigned to pelikhan; reliability improvement but not critical
Quality: 15/20 - CI status unknown; ready for review (not draft); excellent description with implementation plan checklist; includes tests; active review process (6 review comments); refactored duplicated logic into helper function

📋 Recommended Action: batch_review

Well-implemented feature that improves reliability by adding a fallback mechanism. The PR includes tests, good documentation, and has undergone review (6 review comments addressed). While ready for merge, it's not urgent enough for fast-track. Can be reviewed alongside other reliability improvement PRs. The refactoring into helper functions shows good code quality.

Triaged by PR Triage Agent on 2026-02-04T00:35:56Z

AI generated by PR Triage Agent

github-actions · 2026-02-04T03:23:28Z

✨ The prophecy is fulfilled... Smoke Codex has completed its mystical journey. The stars align. 🌟

github-actions · 2026-02-04T03:23:30Z

🎉 Yo ho ho! Changeset Generator found the treasure and completed successfully! ⚓💰

github-actions · 2026-02-04T03:23:33Z

🎬 THE END — Smoke Claude MISSION: ACCOMPLISHED! The hero saves the day! ✨

Smoke test complete - 9/10 tests passed, issue created, discussion commented

github-actions · 2026-02-04T03:23:35Z

📰 BREAKING: Smoke Copilot is now investigating this pull request. Sources say the story is developing...

github-actions · 2026-02-04T03:26:21Z

Agent Container Tool Check ✅

All required development tools are available in the agent container:

Tool	Status	Version
bash	✅	GNU bash 5.2.21
sh	✅	Available
git	✅	2.52.0
jq	✅	1.7
yq	✅	4.x
curl	✅	8.5.0
gh	✅	2.86.0
node	✅	v24.13.0
python3	✅	3.13.11
go	✅	1.24.12
java	✅	Available
dotnet	✅	Available

Result: 12/12 tools available ✅

The agent container environment is properly configured with all necessary development tools for workflow execution.

AI generated by Agent Container Smoke Test

github-actions · 2026-02-04T03:27:08Z

GitHub MCP (last 2 merged PRs): ✅ Update Docker image version in workflow; [WIP] Update Multi-Device Docs Tester .lock.yml for version v0.0.98
safeinputs-gh PR list: ✅ Download agent file from GitHub on demand, reference prompts via URLs; Use AWF --enable-chroot mode and remove unnecessary --mount and --env flags
Serena activate: ✅
Playwright title check: ❌
Tavily search: ✅
File write: ✅
Bash cat verify: ✅
Discussion query+comment: ✅
Build gh-aw: ✅
Overall status: FAIL

AI generated by Smoke Codex

github-actions · 2026-02-04T03:27:11Z

🧪 Smoke Test Results

PR #13612: Download agent file from GitHub on demand
PR #13576: Use AWF --enable-chroot mode

Test Results:

✅ GitHub MCP (2 merged PRs)
✅ Safe Inputs GH CLI (2 PRs queried)
✅ Serena MCP (project activated)
✅ File Writing (test file created)
✅ Bash Tool (file verified)
✅ Discussion Interaction (comment added)
✅ Build gh-aw (binary built successfully)
✅ Workflow Dispatch (haiku triggered)

Overall: PASS ✅

@pelikhan

AI generated by Smoke Copilot

github-actions · 2026-02-04T03:27:30Z

📰 VERDICT: Smoke Copilot has concluded. All systems operational. This is a developing story. 🎤

Initial plan

420c9af

Copilot AI assigned Copilot and pelikhan Feb 3, 2026

Copilot started work on behalf of pelikhan February 3, 2026 19:33 View session

Copilot AI and others added 2 commits February 3, 2026 19:41

Changes before error encountered

f4d38fd

Co-authored-by: pelikhan <4175913+pelikhan@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot AI requested a review from pelikhan February 3, 2026 19:50

Copilot started work on behalf of pelikhan February 3, 2026 20:12 View session

Copilot AI changed the title ~~[WIP] Add fallback to create issue on discussion failure~~ Add fallback to create issue on discussion failure Feb 3, 2026

Copilot finished work on behalf of pelikhan February 3, 2026 20:24

pelikhan marked this pull request as ready for review February 3, 2026 21:16

Merge branch 'main' into copilot/add-fallback-to-issue-option

224957b

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings February 3, 2026 21:16

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of pelikhan February 3, 2026 21:17 View session

pelikhan reviewed Feb 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

Copilot started work on behalf of pelikhan February 3, 2026 21:18 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Feb 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

Copilot AI requested a review from pelikhan February 3, 2026 21:26

Copilot finished work on behalf of pelikhan February 3, 2026 21:26

pelikhan added the smoke label Feb 4, 2026

github-actions bot added smoke-copilot and removed smoke labels Feb 4, 2026

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Feb 4, 2026

Smoke Test: Copilot - 21657153264 #13646

Closed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Feb 4, 2026

Smoke Test: Claude - 21657153252 #13647

Closed

pelikhan merged commit 329ad34 into main Feb 4, 2026
125 checks passed

pelikhan deleted the copilot/add-fallback-to-issue-option branch February 4, 2026 03:29

This was referenced Feb 4, 2026

Smoke Test: Claude - 21657659376 #13650

Closed

[PR Triage Report] PR Triage Report - 2026-02-04 #13669

Open

[docs] Update documentation for features from February 4, 2026 #13688

Merged

[team-status] 🌟 Daily Team Status - February 4, 2026 #13696

Open

Add fallback to create issue on discussion failure #13569

Add fallback to create issue on discussion failure #13569

Conversation

Copilot AI commented Feb 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Implementation Plan: Discussion-to-Issue Fallback

Summary

Implementation Details

Testing

Uh oh!

pelikhan commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

pelikhan Feb 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026

🔍 PR Triage Results

Scores Breakdown

📋 Recommended Action: batch_review

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026

Agent Container Tool Check ✅

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Copilot AI commented Feb 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2026 •

edited

Loading