fix: close-pr count included unsuccessful runs #113
Conversation
Changed the result to look at whether the array actually had a length as on testing I found that it always said "1 PRs closed" when closing a failing PR.
lib/closePR.js
Outdated
| @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ module.exports = async ({ dependents }) => { | |||
| const branch = await context.getTestingBranchName(parentBranchName) | |||
| const resp = await github.getChecks(dependentPkgInfo.owner, dependentPkgInfo.name, branch) | |||
| const closedPR = await closeDependencyPR(dependentPkgInfo.owner, dependentPkgInfo.name, branch, resp.data.check_runs) | |||
| if (closedPR) { | |||
| if (closedPR && closedPR.length > 0) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
in that case, is it ever not an array?
| if (closedPR && closedPR.length > 0) { | |
| if (closedPR.length > 0) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems the tests are now failing?
I haven't checked if this is a mocked response...
| @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ module.exports = async ({ dependents }) => { | |||
| const branch = await context.getTestingBranchName(parentBranchName) | |||
| const resp = await github.getChecks(dependentPkgInfo.owner, dependentPkgInfo.name, branch) | |||
| const closedPR = await closeDependencyPR(dependentPkgInfo.owner, dependentPkgInfo.name, branch, resp.data.check_runs) | |||
| if (closedPR) { | |||
| if (closedPR && closedPR.length > 0) { | |||
| closedPrs.push(closedPR) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe it'd be better to always push it unconditionally, and make the "count" code smarter?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
smart counting is in the TODOs, this is just a tidy up from the first draft update of the readme. But its good to find things when documenting.
assume an array will always be returned
the array length needs to be checked as an array that is empty will be returned by the reduce and promise all combination
|
After having written a unit test to cover this scenario where the PRs raised by wiby fail I do believe that the check if (closedPR && closedPR.length) {
closedPrs.push(closedPR)
}was the correct one as the return will always be an array but can possible be empty which means none of the PRs were closed. |
|
|
|
So the Line 28 in b0fb895 and Line 48 in b0fb895 So yeah, it can be empty, or it can be an array. So we could do what Jordan suggests, or we could return an empty array in the first return point. I'm not too bothered with existing approach as well. However, this does uncover yet another edge case, where I'm not sure the behavior is 100% correct - we do |
Change code per suggestions. Using ?
Optional chaining was available from node 14 onwards, we still support node 12 and so although I'm happy with the change we would have to stop supporting node 12.
|
I did try the optional chaining grammar as LJ suggested but we support node 12 and this feature was not available until node 14. I'm very happy to change the github actions CI to only test from node 14+ but I"m going to wait on feedback |
Changed the result to look at whether the array actually had a length as on testing I found that it always said "1 PRs closed" when closing a failing PR.
During the writing of the documents I created a failing PR from the dependency and the wiby close-pr command was always saying that it was closing it when in fact it was not. The promise all was returning an empty array.