Files
ProxmoxVE/.github/workflows/request-script-eligibility.yml
T
CanbiZ (MickLesk) bffc871aa9 Flag instead of closing on first PR template miss; add script-request eligibility check (#18384)
close-invalid-pr-template.yml now comments and labels (missing pr template,
stale) instead of closing immediately, clears itself once fixed. stale_pr_close.yml
gains the engagement-gated/keep-open/maintainer-reset behavior already used in
DevScripts, so a template-stale PR only closes via its own re-check.

request-script.yml discussion template gets an optional Justification field;
a new workflow verifies stars/age against GitHub for the submitted repo and
either does nothing (eligible), labels investigation (ineligible + justified),
or closes the discussion (ineligible, no justification).

Moved the AI Assistance section to the end of pull_request_template.md.
2026-11-03 14:58:57 +01:00

142 lines
6.4 KiB
YAML
Generated

name: Request Script Eligibility Check
# category.slug is the same string GitHub uses in the "new discussion" URL
# (?category=request-script, linked from every repo's issue chooser), so this
# guard matches the live category without needing its numeric id.
on:
discussion:
types: [created, edited, reopened]
jobs:
check-eligibility:
if: github.repository == 'community-scripts/ProxmoxVE' && github.event.discussion.category.slug == 'request-script'
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
permissions:
discussions: write
issues: write
contents: read
steps:
- name: Verify stars/age, flag or close
uses: actions/github-script@v9
with:
script: |
const owner = context.repo.owner;
const repo = context.repo.repo;
const discussion = context.payload.discussion;
if (!discussion || discussion.state === "closed") {
core.info("Discussion missing or already closed — skipping.");
return;
}
const body = discussion.body || "";
const lines = body.split("\n");
const fields = {};
let current = null;
for (const line of lines) {
const m = line.match(/^###\s+(.+?)\s*$/);
if (m) {
current = m[1].trim();
fields[current] = [];
} else if (current) {
fields[current].push(line);
}
}
function fieldText(label) {
const raw = (fields[label] || []).join("\n").trim();
return raw === "_No response_" ? "" : raw;
}
const sourceRepo = fieldText("Source Repository");
const justification = fieldText("Justification for an exception");
let eligible = false;
let verified = false;
const ghMatch = sourceRepo.match(/^https?:\/\/(?:www\.)?github\.com\/([^\/\s]+)\/([^\/\s#?]+?)(?:\.git)?\/?(?:[#?].*)?$/i);
if (ghMatch) {
const [, repoOwner, repoName] = ghMatch;
try {
const { data: repoData } = await github.rest.repos.get({ owner: repoOwner, repo: repoName });
const stars = repoData.stargazers_count;
const createdAt = new Date(repoData.created_at);
const now = new Date();
const ageMonths =
(now.getFullYear() - createdAt.getFullYear()) * 12 +
(now.getMonth() - createdAt.getMonth()) -
(now.getDate() < createdAt.getDate() ? 1 : 0);
eligible = stars >= 1000 && ageMonths >= 6;
verified = true;
core.info(`Verified ${repoOwner}/${repoName}: ${stars} stars, ${ageMonths} months old, eligible=${eligible}`);
} catch (err) {
core.warning(`Could not verify ${repoOwner}/${repoName}: ${err.message} — treating as unverifiable.`);
}
} else {
core.info("Source Repository is not a github.com URL — cannot auto-verify, treating as unverifiable.");
}
if (eligible) {
core.info(`Discussion #${discussion.number} meets the requirements — no action.`);
return;
}
const labels = (discussion.labels || []).map(l => l.name);
const reasonLine = verified
? "the source repository does not meet the 1,000-star / 6-month minimum adoption requirement"
: "the source repository's star count and age could not be verified automatically";
if (justification) {
if (labels.includes("investigation")) {
core.info(`Discussion #${discussion.number} already flagged for investigation — skipping.`);
return;
}
try {
await github.rest.issues.createLabel({
owner, repo, name: "investigation",
color: "fbca04",
description: "Below the normal script-request threshold; a justification was given and needs maintainer review.",
});
} catch (err) {
if (err.status !== 422) throw err;
}
const labelQuery = await github.graphql(
`query($owner: String!, $repo: String!) { repository(owner: $owner, name: $repo) { label(name: "investigation") { id } } }`,
{ owner, repo }
);
const labelNodeId = labelQuery.repository.label.id;
await github.graphql(
`mutation($labelableId: ID!, $labelIds: [ID!]!) { addLabelsToLabelable(input: { labelableId: $labelableId, labelIds: $labelIds }) { clientMutationId } }`,
{ labelableId: discussion.node_id, labelIds: [labelNodeId] }
);
await github.graphql(
`mutation($discussionId: ID!, $body: String!) { addDiscussionComment(input: { discussionId: $discussionId, body: $body }) { comment { id } } }`,
{
discussionId: discussion.node_id,
body:
`Thanks for the justification — ${reasonLine}, so this has been flagged \`investigation\` for a maintainer ` +
`to review manually rather than closed automatically.`,
}
);
} else {
await github.graphql(
`mutation($discussionId: ID!, $body: String!) { addDiscussionComment(input: { discussionId: $discussionId, body: $body }) { comment { id } } }`,
{
discussionId: discussion.node_id,
body:
`This request doesn't meet the minimum requirements (1,000 stars, project at least 6 months old) — ` +
`${reasonLine}, and no justification was given. Closing automatically.\n\n` +
`If you believe this project qualifies for an exception, edit this discussion to fill in ` +
`**Justification for an exception** and reopen it — it will then be flagged for manual review instead of closed again.`,
}
);
await github.graphql(
`mutation($discussionId: ID!) { closeDiscussion(input: { discussionId: $discussionId, reason: OUTDATED }) { discussion { id } } }`,
{ discussionId: discussion.node_id }
);
}