Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix(PL-2680): exclude gha bot from reviewers #168

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 1, 2024

Conversation

silphid
Copy link
Contributor

@silphid silphid commented May 1, 2024

No description provided.

@silphid silphid force-pushed the fix/PL-2680/exclude-gha-bot-from-reviewers branch from 495c33e to 7a9c8bc Compare May 1, 2024 14:27
Copy link
Collaborator

@alexstojda alexstojda left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Once comment, else LGTM

Comment on lines +84 to +86
if reviewer == "github-actions[bot]" {
continue
}
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should this be hardcoded? Maybe some other workflows will use another bot name.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, that's possible, but we're assuming that's the only one that GHA uses. We went for the simplest solution to address the issue promptly. If we realize there is a wealth of different GH users we may want to exclude, we'll introduce a catalog-level config to specify them. But let's see first, if you're okay with that.

@silphid silphid merged commit 45bdf66 into master May 1, 2024
4 checks passed
@silphid silphid deleted the fix/PL-2680/exclude-gha-bot-from-reviewers branch May 1, 2024 14:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants