Skip to content

Conversation

@Simyon264
Copy link
Member

About the PR

Deletes our current labeling workflows in favor of https://github.com/space-wizards/SS14.Labeller

Why / Balance

Currently, our label workflows are kind of bad. They race condition each other and the review label workflow does not work at all.
As a solution I have made SS14.Labeller, a NativeAOT ASP NET Core application that labels PRs and issues using a webhook and GitHub PAT Token. Because it uses NativeAOT compilation, the application only uses around 20mb of RAM.

Requirements

Breaking changes

Label workflows have been removed in favor of https://github.com/space-wizards/SS14.Labeller

@github-actions github-actions bot added S: Needs Review Status: Requires additional reviews before being fully accepted. Not to be replaced by S: Approved. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 100-999 lines. Changes: No C# Changes: Requires no C# knowledge to review or fix this item. S: Untriaged Status: Indicates an item has not been triaged and doesn't have appropriate labels. and removed S: Needs Review Status: Requires additional reviews before being fully accepted. Not to be replaced by S: Approved. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 100-999 lines. labels Jun 29, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the S: Merge Conflict Status: Needs to resolve merge conflicts before it can be accepted label Jun 29, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 100-999 lines. and removed S: Merge Conflict Status: Needs to resolve merge conflicts before it can be accepted labels Jun 29, 2025
@ArtisticRoomba
Copy link
Member

my hero

@Simyon264 Simyon264 added S: DO NOT MERGE Status: Open item that should NOT be merged. DNM. Allows test to run unlike draft. P3: Standard Priority: Default priority for repository items. T: Refactor Type: Refactor of notable amount of codebase A: Core Tech Area: Underlying core tech for the game and the Github repository. and removed S: Untriaged Status: Indicates an item has not been triaged and doesn't have appropriate labels. labels Jun 29, 2025
@Simyon264
Copy link
Member Author

DNM while SS14.Labeller isn't setup.

@Simyon264 Simyon264 requested a review from PJB3005 June 29, 2025 13:53
@github-actions github-actions bot added the S: Needs Review Status: Requires additional reviews before being fully accepted. Not to be replaced by S: Approved. label Jun 29, 2025
Copy link
Member

@PJB3005 PJB3005 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we want to just disable these workflows instead? So downstreams can use them.

@PJBot PJBot added S: Awaiting Changes Status: Changes are required before another review can happen and removed S: Needs Review Status: Requires additional reviews before being fully accepted. Not to be replaced by S: Approved. labels Jun 29, 2025
@Simyon264
Copy link
Member Author

If we just disable the checks it (probably, not sure) show up under every PR as a "skipped" check which is annoying

@PJB3005
Copy link
Member

PJB3005 commented Jun 29, 2025

If we just disable the checks it (probably, not sure) show up under every PR as a "skipped" check which is annoying

This has been shown to be incorrect.

@PJB3005 PJB3005 closed this Jun 29, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

A: Core Tech Area: Underlying core tech for the game and the Github repository. Changes: No C# Changes: Requires no C# knowledge to review or fix this item. P3: Standard Priority: Default priority for repository items. S: Awaiting Changes Status: Changes are required before another review can happen S: DO NOT MERGE Status: Open item that should NOT be merged. DNM. Allows test to run unlike draft. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 100-999 lines. T: Refactor Type: Refactor of notable amount of codebase

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants