Skip to content

Add issue approver output and enhance approval logic - #206

Open
felpasl wants to merge 3 commits into
trstringer:mainfrom
felpasl:feat/190-add-approver-output
Open

Add issue approver output and enhance approval logic#206
felpasl wants to merge 3 commits into
trstringer:mainfrom
felpasl:feat/190-add-approver-output

Conversation

@felpasl

@felpasl felpasl commented Jan 26, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
  • Updated action outputs to include the GitHub username of the approver.
  • Modified approval logic to return the approver's username upon approval or denial.
  • Enhanced tests to validate the new approver output.

related to #190

Comment thread action.yaml Outdated
- Updated action outputs to include the GitHub username of the approver.
- Modified approval logic to return the approver's username upon approval or denial.
- Enhanced tests to validate the new approver output.

Rename 'issue-approver' to 'issue-responder' for clarity in approval process
@felpasl
felpasl force-pushed the feat/190-add-approver-output branch from e4012c2 to bac46d0 Compare January 27, 2026 11:09
@felpasl

felpasl commented Jan 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@lizziemac If possible, please review these changes; otherwise, I may publish the fork for my own use.

thanks.

@snskArora

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@lizziemac If possible, please review these changes; otherwise, I may publish the fork for my own use.

thanks.

Hi @felpasl

Thanks a lot for this contribution. I understand that it has been very long, and you might have deployed your fork. The code changes look good to me. For good measure, is it possible to share some test results to show no breaking change for users operating with the previous version of inputs, and one test with your change?

Comment thread Makefile Outdated
@lizziemac lizziemac added the Changes Requested Awaiting for a response on the open commnets label Apr 13, 2026
Comment thread Makefile Outdated
@lizziemac

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@felpasl Apologies for how long the back and forth is here, I wasn't getting emails for direct @'s. I can approve this once the test_docker target is separated out

Making this change to merge it for now, later please create a new PR for these/similar changes.
@snskArora

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Would need to refactor this quite a bit, will pick it up tommorow -- quite a lot of changes so not as straightforward as initial thought.

@CAOShurong CAOShurong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The exact head dbfab57 does not compile, so the new output cannot yet be exercised.

  • newCommentLoopChannel now returns chan commentLoopResult, but the issue-state error path and externally closed issue path still send the integer literal 1 (main.go:147 and main.go:176).
  • The select arm binds result, but main.go:386, main.go:388, and main.go:389 still reference the removed exitCode variable instead of result.exitCode.

I reproduced these five compile errors with go test -mod=mod -count=1 ./..., go vet -mod=mod ./..., go build -mod=mod ./..., and golangci-lint. The same commands pass on the current base. Public CI run 28285105918 likewise fails in Build and skips Test/Lint.

Please migrate both sends to commentLoopResult and use result.exitCode consistently, then rerun the focused/full tests and container action path. The approval, denial, closed-issue, and issue-responder output paths remain unverified until the exact head builds.

Review prepared with OpenAI Codex assistance; the exact head, commands, outputs, and public CI state were independently rerun and checked before submission.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Changes Requested Awaiting for a response on the open commnets

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants