Fixes issue 58 install 2 week inactive GitHub automation

[joey-ma]

Fixes issue #58

Summary:

1. Based on Bonnie's write-up, I think it makes sense to keep everything the same as how the website team currently has it.
2. I did look over the code and refactored some parts of the code (with some personal preference and the intention of cleaner code), but not all (since I realized midpoint it'd be better to know that the GHA will work first, and then perhaps after learning of a way to test locally before I make further changes I can do more refactoring, if time allows).
3. I tried act and act -n (dryrun) seemed successful. Otherwise, will (eventually) need the appropriate secrets, which perhaps we can discuss during Wednesday's ops meeting. Open to hearing how someone else does this.
4. I checked and see that labels To Update ! and added Status: Updated are already there, so I just added 2 weeks inactive in case it's needed.
5. If I recall correctly, we wanted to set the GHA to run on Sundays. (or Mondays?) Let me know if this (or anything) should be changed/improved.

Thanks!

[joey-ma]

I fixed a bug relating to a typo and added some basic error handling.

I believe it should work now. Let's give it a try?

[freaky4wrld]

@joey-ma are you able to test it anyhow??

[joey-ma]

@joey-ma are you able to test it anyhow??

I was able to run it, but not completely. To test it thoroughly, I think it would require some additional work that might not be worth it. I think it'd be more effectively tested by merging it in.

[freaky4wrld]

Hey @joey-ma I guess this document might help you to test the GHA https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ya-Al4k9i1Nu7pq2pc_0J2xxEfQ6mO8-kw0nxqeRMIc/edit#heading=h.t6xbafvaf6mp

Don't know whether you can see it, provide me you email

[joey-ma]

Sorry for missing the last ops meeting. @freaky4wrld Once I am able to open the Google Doc, I'll also take a look and see what useful info it has.

In short, I've already explored how to test it. I just don't know how I can have the applicable environment to test it. I foresee it being tough to copy things over from hackforla/ops to my forked joey-ma/ops repo with the issues (I don't have it in my forked repo) and projects (I copied the Project Management Board, but none of the issues are copied over), and comments (even if I have projects filled with issues, I'll need to have some comments (on a issues for multiple scenarios), maybe some PRs, to test things out, etc.

Again, the act -n returned successful.

I'll need the tokens and secrets to run act to see additional progress, which we can discuss during the ops meeting. I'm leaning towards not including secrets and tokens here in comments. Eventually it'd be nice to have docs on this for future maintainers.

[freaky4wrld]

@joey-ma I have provided the access to you please check the slack message

[joey-ma]

Thanks for the access to Google Doc. It was helpful, but as mentioned in the doc, it would be hard to test it further without the same environment: issues, comments, Project Board, etc

This is tricky because I think I would need a near identical environment in my forked repo as it is in hackforla/ops. I am now seeing some additional error log for me to work on so I will continue to work on this.

[joey-ma]

@freaky4wrld I was able to refactor the code for better readability and include additional error handling. While I was not able to confirm if I could access the secrets.IN_PROGRESS_COLUMN_ID, the our .github/workflows/add-update-label-weekly.yml is near identical to hackforla/website team's .github/workflows/schedule-fri-0700.yml file. So here's the latest successful local act run.

[freaky4wrld]

@joey-ma I was able to test the GHA, although it wasn't able to add those labels..... but it did posted those comments on the test-issue created freaky4wrld#1

Also here are the GHA logs where it failed https://github.com/freaky4wrld/ops/actions/runs/8811559223/job/24185674271

[freaky4wrld]

@joey-ma I was able to test the GHA, although it wasn't able to add those labels..... but it did posted those comments on the test-issue created freaky4wrld#1

Also here are the GHA logs where it failed https://github.com/freaky4wrld/ops/actions/runs/8811559223/job/24185674271 , due to absence of those labels... but I guess we need to create those labels in the hackforla/ops rep to make it work.

let's discuss it over with @chelseybeck and then merge it !!

This is approved from my side....

Just uncomment the getIssueNumsFromColumn function on line 35

[joey-ma]

@chelseybeck After discussing with @freaky4wrld, we felt it is ok to move to merging the PR, followed by further observation on the behavior of GHA, given the current understanding that there seems to be no way to verify that the particular secrets/env variable can be tested in the current state. Let me know your thoughts. Thanks