juliethecao opened a new pull request, #5651:
URL: https://github.com/apache/texera/pull/5651
<!--
Thanks for sending a pull request (PR)! Here are some tips for you:
1. If this is your first time, please read our contributor guidelines:
[Contributing to
Texera](https://github.com/apache/texera/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md)
2. Ensure you have added or run the appropriate tests for your PR
3. If the PR is work in progress, mark it a draft on GitHub.
4. Please write your PR title to summarize what this PR proposes, we
are following Conventional Commits style for PR titles as well.
5. Be sure to keep the PR description updated to reflect all changes.
-->
### What changes were proposed in this PR?
This PR adds an automatic reviewer suggestion CI job to
`.github/workflows/comment-commands.yml`. When a PR is opened or updated
(pull_request: opened, synchronize, reopened), the CI automatically runs `git
blame -p` at the base commit on each changed file to identify who most recently
touched that code. Candidates are split into two groups:
- Committers — collaborators who can be formally review-requested via
GitHub's API
- Non-committer contributors — have context but cannot be review-requested;
the author can @-mention them to notify
The CI posts a comment in this format:
`Suggested reviewers (based on git blame of changed files):`
`Committers — can be formally requested: @ alice, @ bob`
`Non-committer contributors — cc to notify: @ carol`
`Use /request-review @ alice to request a review, or cc @ carol to notify
them.`
On every subsequent push, the job finds the existing suggestion comment (via
a hidden HTML marker <!-- texera-reviewer-suggestion -->) and edits it in
place, keeping the PR timeline clean. The CI never sends a review request on
its own as the author must explicitly use /request-review @ user.
Files with status added are skipped before git blame is attempted since they
did not exist at the base commit.
<!--
Please clarify what changes you are proposing. The purpose of this section
is to outline the changes. Here are some tips for you:
1. If you propose a new API, clarify the use case for a new API.
2. If you fix a bug, you can clarify why it is a bug.
3. If it is a refactoring, clarify what has been changed.
3. It would be helpful to include a before-and-after comparison using
screenshots or GIFs.
4. Please consider writing useful notes for better and faster reviews.
-->
### Any related issues, documentation, discussions?
Closes #5611
<!--
Please use this section to link other resources if not mentioned already.
1. If this PR fixes an issue, please include `Fixes #1234`, `Resolves
#1234`
or `Closes #1234`. If it is only related, simply mention the issue
number.
2. If there is design documentation, please add the link.
3. If there is a discussion in the mailing list, please add the link.
-->
### How was this PR tested?
**Unit tests**: 83 tests across 9 suites were written locally
(https://github.com/juliethecao/texera/tree/cc-test) to cover the core
JavaScript logic extracted from the workflow: `git blame -p` output parsing,
candidate ranking, comment body generation, find-or-update marker logic,
author/bot exclusion, @ mention parsing, file status filtering, candidate
accumulation, and MARKER integrity. Tests were not checked in as the logic
lives inside a GitHub Actions script rather than a standalone module.
**Manual CI test**: A test PR was opened on a personal fork
(https://github.com/juliethecao/texera/pull/9) against the feature branch as
the base. The suggest-reviewers job triggered on open, ran git blame on the
changed files, and posted the suggestion comment. Closing and reopening the PR
confirmed the comment was updated in place rather than duplicated.
<!--
If tests were added, say they were added here. Or simply mention that if the
PR
is tested with existing test cases. Make sure to include/update test cases
that
check the changes thoroughly including negative and positive cases if
possible.
If it was tested in a way different from regular unit tests, please clarify
how
you tested step by step, ideally copy and paste-able, so that other
reviewers can
test and check, and descendants can verify in the future. If tests were not
added,
please describe why they were not added and/or why it was difficult to add.
-->
### Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
Co-authored with Claude Sonnet 4.6 in compliance with ASF guidelines
<!--
If generative AI tooling has been used in the process of authoring this PR,
please include the phrase: 'Generated-by: ' followed by the name of the tool
and its version. If no, write 'No'.
Please refer to the [ASF Generative Tooling
Guidance](https://www.apache.org/legal/generative-tooling.html) for details.
-->
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
