Should new prefix issue workflow logic consider one or more issues? #1267
Comments
|
Based on the last line of this comment: #1193 (review), I have been creating individual PRs for every new curation in order to limit the scope and not create too much cross communication between unrelated resources where information can easily get lost. If we want to continue this then it probably makes more sense to limit the workflow to not iterate over every open issue. Especially considering that we often make edits and suggestions to the content of a new entry before merging it. |
bgyori
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 27, 2025
This pull request addresses the following issue: #1267 The purpose of this PR is to update the new prefix issue workflow logic to only process the issue that triggered the workflow and not iterate over every relevant open issue as it currently does. I've outlined the changes below: `github_client.py`: - Added `get_form_data_for_issue` function to retrieve and parse form data for a specific issue `new_prefix.py`: - Updated the main function to accept an optional issue parameter - Uses `get_form_data_for_issue` to only process information about the prefix corresponding to the specific issue number - Only searches all relevant new prefix issues if issue parameter not provided `new_prefix_pr.yml`: - Added logic to extract issue number and run workflow only on that specific issue Thanks to @bgyori for writing most of the logic to handle these changes in the `new_prefix_single` branch I have tested the logic in a forked repository which shows that the updated workflow successfully generated a PR when a specific issue number is provided as a parameter --------- Co-authored-by: Benjamin M. Gyori <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Charles Tapley Hoyt <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Currently (as well as before the changes in #1258), the code turning new prefix issues into PRs iterates over multiple issues and thereby considers multiple prefixes simultaneously for addition. An example of this is #1266 where both #1257 and #1265 were processed and added to a PR.
Should this logic be preserved, or alternatively, should we look at the payload in this section
https://github.com/biopragmatics/bioregistry/blob/main/.github/workflows/new_prefix_pr.yml#L24-L26
to figure out what specific new issue triggered the workflow, and just create a PR from that given issue, not other past issues?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: