fix: remove worst-wins escalation logic (#28)
CI / test (pull_request) Successful in 14s
CI / review (gpt-4.1, gpt, GPT_REVIEW_TOKEN) (pull_request) Successful in 23s
CI / review (gpt-5, security, SECURITY_REVIEW.md, SONNET_REVIEW_TOKEN) (pull_request) Successful in 36s
CI / review (gpt-5, sonnet, SONNET_REVIEW_TOKEN) (pull_request) Successful in 39s
CI / test (pull_request) Successful in 14s
CI / review (gpt-4.1, gpt, GPT_REVIEW_TOKEN) (pull_request) Successful in 23s
CI / review (gpt-5, security, SECURITY_REVIEW.md, SONNET_REVIEW_TOKEN) (pull_request) Successful in 36s
CI / review (gpt-5, sonnet, SONNET_REVIEW_TOKEN) (pull_request) Successful in 39s
This commit is contained in:
@@ -266,16 +266,7 @@ func main() {
|
||||
if err != nil {
|
||||
log.Printf("Warning: could not list existing reviews: %v", err)
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
// Worst-wins: escalate if a sibling blocks (need own login from existing review)
|
||||
ownLogin := ""
|
||||
existing := findOwnReview(existingReviews, sentinel)
|
||||
if existing != nil {
|
||||
ownLogin = existing.User.Login
|
||||
}
|
||||
if event == "APPROVED" && shouldEscalate(existingReviews, 0, ownLogin, sentinel) {
|
||||
log.Printf("Sibling review has REQUEST_CHANGES; escalating to REQUEST_CHANGES")
|
||||
event = "REQUEST_CHANGES"
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if existing != nil {
|
||||
if reviewUnchanged(existingReviews, reviewBody, event, sentinel) {
|
||||
@@ -322,29 +313,6 @@ func main() {
|
||||
}
|
||||
log.Printf("Review posted (id=%d, user=%s)", posted.ID, posted.User.Login)
|
||||
|
||||
// Post-posting escalation: if we just posted APPROVED but a sibling
|
||||
// from the same user has REQUEST_CHANGES, mark ours as superseded and
|
||||
// re-post as REQUEST_CHANGES. This handles the first-run case where
|
||||
// we don't know our login until after posting.
|
||||
if event == "APPROVED" && *updateExisting && *reviewerName != "" {
|
||||
reviews, err := giteaClient.ListReviews(ctx, owner, repoName, prNumber)
|
||||
if err == nil && shouldEscalate(reviews, posted.ID, posted.User.Login, sentinel) {
|
||||
log.Printf("Post-posting escalation: sibling has REQUEST_CHANGES")
|
||||
// Mark our just-posted review as superseded
|
||||
commentID, err := giteaClient.GetTimelineReviewCommentID(ctx, owner, repoName, prNumber, sentinel)
|
||||
if err == nil {
|
||||
supersededBody := fmt.Sprintf("~~*This review has been superseded by a newer review below.*~~\n\n%s", sentinel)
|
||||
giteaClient.EditComment(ctx, owner, repoName, commentID, supersededBody)
|
||||
}
|
||||
// Re-post as REQUEST_CHANGES
|
||||
_, err = giteaClient.PostReview(ctx, owner, repoName, prNumber, "REQUEST_CHANGES", reviewBody, inlineComments)
|
||||
if err != nil {
|
||||
log.Printf("Warning: could not re-post as REQUEST_CHANGES: %v", err)
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
log.Printf("Review escalated to REQUEST_CHANGES")
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// fetchFileContext fetches the full content of modified files from the PR branch.
|
||||
@@ -501,26 +469,6 @@ func validateReviewerName(name string) error {
|
||||
return nil
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// shouldEscalate checks if any sibling bot review from the same user
|
||||
// (different sentinel, same token) has REQUEST_CHANGES.
|
||||
// ownLogin is the bot user login; if empty, escalation check is skipped.
|
||||
// postedID is excluded from consideration (0 means no exclusion needed).
|
||||
func shouldEscalate(reviews []gitea.Review, postedID int64, ownLogin, ownSentinel string) bool {
|
||||
if ownLogin == "" {
|
||||
return false
|
||||
}
|
||||
for _, r := range reviews {
|
||||
if r.ID == postedID || r.Stale {
|
||||
continue
|
||||
}
|
||||
// Sibling = same user, has a review-bot sentinel, but not OUR sentinel
|
||||
if r.User.Login == ownLogin && r.State == "REQUEST_CHANGES" && strings.Contains(r.Body, "<!-- review-bot:") && !strings.Contains(r.Body, ownSentinel) {
|
||||
return true
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
return false
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// reviewUnchanged checks if an existing review with the same sentinel
|
||||
// already has identical body and state. Returns true if a re-post would
|
||||
// produce the same result (skip to preserve conversation threads).
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user