search

IEvangelist / profanity-filter

Potty Mouth: A GitHub Action profanity filter written in .NET, leveraging Native AOT compilation.
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/developing-optimized-github-actions-with-net-and-native-aot
MIT License
24 stars 7 forks source link

Unable to get issue comment with id: [...] #41

Open DecimalTurn opened 3 months ago

DecimalTurn commented 3 months ago

I'm getting an error when the action tries to access a comment: https://github.com/DecimalTurn/VBA-on-GitHub-Automations/actions/runs/10566141857

(This prevents the action from applying the filter on this comment).

My yaml file ```yaml name: Comments filter on: issue_comment: types: [created, edited] # issues: # types: [opened, edited, reopened] # pull_request: # types: [opened, edited, reopened] permissions: issues: write pull-requests: write jobs: apply-filter: name: Apply comment filter runs-on: ubuntu-latest steps: # DDOS protection (optional - mostly useful for self-hosted GitHub servers) #- name: Harden Runner # uses: step-security/harden-runner@5c7944e73c4c2a096b17a9cb74d65b6c2bbafbde # v2.9.1 # with: # egress-policy: audit - name: Comment filter if: ${{ github.actor != 'dependabot[bot]' && github.actor != 'github-actions[bot]' }} uses: IEvangelist/profanity-filter@7b35b30e0d01d3c4a63a57b2ec5db0768bc4d53b # v1.0.74 id: profanity-filter with: token: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }} replacement-strategy: redacted-rectangle ```
DecimalTurn commented 3 months ago

Seems like the donet/docs repo is also having this issue: https://github.com/dotnet/docs/actions/runs/10492792116?pr=42254+%28comment%29

image

IEvangelist commented 3 months ago

I'm looking into this now, thanks for posting the issue.

IEvangelist commented 3 months ago

I reported this upstream, the issue seems to be something related to the GitHub.Octokit.SDK that my Actions.Octokit library is relying on.

https://github.com/octokit/dotnet-sdk/issues/117

DecimalTurn commented 3 months ago

Thanks for the follow up!

Sidenote: Shouldn't the action fail in cases like this? The fact it's failling silently makes it harder to notice that something isn't working properly.

IEvangelist commented 3 months ago

Shouldn't the action fail in cases like this? The fact it's failling silently makes it harder to notice that something isn't working properly.

I've thought about this before. In most of our use-cases, we don't want a failure. It's intended to run and filter profane content. If it fails in doing so, it's not the end of the world. We just didn't want a failure to cause issues with preventing a PR for example from being mergeable. Does that make sense?

DecimalTurn commented 3 months ago

Yeah, I guess it does make sense for PR creation.