Add option to expand reviewers in details UI #656
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
If the `options.expand_required_reviewers` server option is set, when a user expands a rule in the details UI, policy-bot will expand the teams, organizations, and permission levels that can approve that rule in to a list of user names. This can make it easier to figure out who needs to approve your PR. This feature is disabled by default because it can expose otherwise private information about membership. Only enable it in trusted environments. This uses the HTMX library to handle loading user lists in the frontend on demand, instead of precomputing all of the information everytime someone views the details of a PR.
bluekeyes
commented
Dec 8, 2023
|
|
||
| owner := pat.Param(r, "owner") | ||
| repo := pat.Param(r, "repo") | ||
| var data struct { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This diff is weird, but everything after this line in this function is the same as before, except for some variable names. I extracted all the stuff that came before this in to helper functions for reuse.
jamestoyer
approved these changes
Dec 11, 2023
| @@ -73,6 +80,8 @@ func (p *PullEvaluationOptions) SetValuesFromEnv(prefix string) { | |||
| setStringFromEnv("SHARED_REPOSITORY", prefix, &p.SharedRepository) | |||
| setStringFromEnv("SHARED_POLICY_PATH", prefix, &p.SharedPolicyPath) | |||
| setStringFromEnv("STATUS_CHECK_CONTEXT", prefix, &p.StatusCheckContext) | |||
| setBoolFromEnv("EXPAND_REQUIRED_REVIEWERS", prefix, &p.ExpandRequiredReviewers) | |||
| setBoolFromEnv("POST_INSECURE_STATUS_CHECKS", prefix, &p.PostInsecureStatusChecks) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I assume that this is an existing setting that's missing from the env vars?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I figured I would add it for consistency now that there's a setBoolFromEnv function
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
If the
options.expand_required_reviewersserver option is set, when a user expands a rule in the details UI, policy-bot will expand the teams, organizations, and permission levels that can approve that rule in to a list of user names. This can make it easier to figure out who needs to approve your PR.This feature is disabled by default because it can expose otherwise private information about membership. Only enable it in trusted environments.
This uses the HTMX library to handle loading user lists in the frontend on demand, instead of precomputing all of the information every time someone views the details of a PR. For now, I've committed a minified copy of the library, but we'll probably want to install it with
yarnin the future.Here's a quick screen capture that shows both the feature and the error behavior:
Since this is purely information, if there are any problems loading information, we warn the user that results may be incomplete but otherwise don't fail.
I'd also like to revisit the layout of users, since a single list will be pretty long if there are a lot of users. I think columns would work, but I was wasting too much time trying to make a column layout that didn't fall apart with really long usernames. I'll revisit this either before this PR merges or in a follow-up.
Closes #49.