Add composite workflow action for checking user permissions prior to updating snapshots - #268
Conversation
Co-authored-by: Nicolas Brichet <32258950+brichet@users.noreply.github.com>
|
Thanks @brichet ! I've been able to confirm the reusable worfklow works as expected from that PR
|
|
This is technically a "composite action", not a "reusable workflow" 😝 (sorry, I just expected something different based on the PR title when Martin and I were chatting on a call this morning!) |
brichet
left a comment
brichet
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @martinRenou, LGTM.
martinRenou
changed the title
|
Thanks a lot for the review and suggestion @brichet ! Let's hold before merging, @krassowski had some suggestion in jupyterlab/jupyterlab#18334, looking into it now. @mfisher87 thanks! I renamed the PR |
|
Done and checked again that it works. |
| pushed_at="$(echo "$pr" | jq -r .pushed_at)" | ||
|
|
||
| if [[ $(date -d "$pushed_at" +%s) -gt $(date -d "$COMMENT_AT" +%s) ]]; then | ||
| echo "Updating is not allowed because the PR was pushed to (at $pushed_at) after the triggering comment was issued (at $COMMENT_AT)" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe for a follow up PR, but I wonder if we could add a comment or replace the previous 👍 with a 👎, to have a visual indication that something did not work. Same for the step below.
Otherwise it looks good, thanks.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Makes sense! Yes a comment saying the bot failed, with a link to the logs, would be great. Plus, the link to the logs could probably always show up in a comment, so that users know where to look for.
Agreed to make that as a follow-up 👍🏽
|
Thanks @martinRenou. |
3 participants
Solution for jupyterlab/jupyterlab#17764
Sibling PR jupyterlab/jupyterlab#18334