@longwave thanks for logging this. It was a known limitation when we implemented label support; however I see that I did not make that very clear. Pull requests webhooks would need to be configured to include label events, and we'll need to enhance the plugin to ingest them properly.

I can't get to this for awhile but wanted to acknowledge that you're right; it's an issue. I'll be glad to review any PRs in the meantime, and will otherwise get to this when I can.

+1 This just hit me, and it took me a while to find this bug report. It seemed to simply not be working until I realized this.

+1 Would love a fix for this, to support a complete label-centric workflow

@benpatterson I am trying to find the source of the issue. It would be awesome if you provide some guidance on where the related code lives.

I am suspecting this place GhprbPullRequest.java#L227.

@Bamieh I can only give some vague advice, i'm afraid. (I no longer maintain this plugin.) However, I'm still convinced it would not be hard to add support for this.

The line you point out...what that does is check labels to see if the pull request has the whitelisted ones. Arguably that part of the logic is "working". The problem is, at this point no labels are seen. Or maybe more accurately, no new labels are seen.

I think one place to start might actually be in GhprbCause.java. You'll see that we don't take any label information when we receive a webhook. What I do not know, is what webhooks look like with label information. Hopefully, it's just an additional attribute, and you can put in a statement or two that initializes label information for the Cause. So, it could be that you want to change your webhook, and then ensure you are pulling out label information for every new webhook.

This may or may not help, but I also draw your attention to a key dependent library, which is the github-api dependency. Specifically, there is a GHLabel class here. You may or may not need that class, but I thought I'd point it out in case it's handy.

This is my best guess at the moment; I could be wrong. But hopefully this at least gives you or someone else a good place to start.

Hi @bjoernhaeuser , is there any movement on this issue?
This PR has been suggested almost two years ago as a solution: #639
Any reason why it's still not merged? It seems like a fundamental drawback in the plugin.

+1 for the feature request

Hi, is this fixed?

I would love to have this fixed! Who can I bribe?

Hi can we merge the fix for this? #804

Would be extremely useful if we can get this out.