Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CI: Add automatic PR review for misspellings #56

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 2, 2020

Conversation

zbeekman
Copy link
Member

Add bot to post comments/reviews on PRs for misspelling issues using reviewdog/action-misspell

A new token may need to be created to allow comments to be posted on PRs instead of just PR status. This would have caught typos in my previous PRs. Token info is here: https://github.com/reviewdog/reviewdog#reporter-github-pullrequest-review-comment--reportergithub-pr-review

@zbeekman zbeekman force-pushed the pr-spellchecker branch 2 times, most recently from 043c271 to e8b8f8b Compare December 31, 2019 02:56
@certik
Copy link
Member

certik commented Dec 31, 2019

This is what I see in the test:

Screenshot_2019-12-31 CI Add automatic PR review for misspellings by zbeekman · Pull Request #56 · fortran-lang stdlib

Does that mean it passed it? How does it look like when it fails?

Can you please rebase on top of the latest master, so that we can merge it?

@zbeekman
Copy link
Member Author

@certik: With the token setup correctly, it will comment in the PR if it detects misspellings in changed files:

rd-image

No need to check the CI output by hand. We may need to create a new token and set it in the repo's secrets. I will rebase this onto master soon, but I need to run out for a moment right now.

@certik
Copy link
Member

certik commented Dec 31, 2019 via email

@zbeekman
Copy link
Member Author

Do you know how often this has false positives? Say reporting some correctly spelled Fortran variable names as misspelled?

In my experience this almost never happens. It doesn't change the PR status just posts comments on the code, so false positives can be easily ignored. If it becomes an issue we can always remove it.

@certik
Copy link
Member

certik commented Jan 1, 2020

@zbeekman you should have push access and other rights to the repository. Go ahead and set this up if you have time.

Let's try it, and if it works, great. If it doesn't work for us, we can remove it later.

Copy link
Member

@certik certik left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me. I'll leave it to you @zbeekman to merge and to set this up if some token has to be setup.

@zbeekman
Copy link
Member Author

zbeekman commented Jan 2, 2020

Looks good to me. I'll leave it to you @zbeekman to merge and to set this up if some token has to be setup.

Great, and if it ever has too many false-positives, etc. we should disable it or tweak the scope.

One small issue regarding tokens: I'm happy to provide a personal access token with the correct scopes, however to add the secret to the repository someone with greater privileges (admin I think) will need to do so.

@certik
Copy link
Member

certik commented Jan 2, 2020

Send me the token by email and I'll put it there.

@zbeekman zbeekman merged commit 231b77a into fortran-lang:master Jan 2, 2020
@zbeekman zbeekman deleted the pr-spellchecker branch January 2, 2020 16:24
@zbeekman zbeekman mentioned this pull request Jan 2, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants