Enhance pull request description validation

guibranco commented 1 week ago

User description

Closes #

📑 Description

✅ Checks

[x] My pull request adheres to the code style of this project
[x] My code requires changes to the documentation
[x] I have updated the documentation as required
[x] All the tests have passed

☢️ Does this introduce a breaking change?

[x] Yes
[ ] No

ℹ Additional Information

Description

Introduced a new function to validate the length of pull request descriptions.
Ensured that descriptions are at least 250 characters long.
Updated the check run status based on the validation result.

Changes walkthrough 📝

Relevant files

Enhancement

pullRequests.php

Enhance pull request description validation

src/pullRequests.php

Added a new function checkPullRequestDescription.

Implemented validation for pull request description length.

Set check run status based on description length.

+13/-0

Summary by CodeRabbit

New Features
- Introduced a validation step for pull request descriptions, ensuring they meet a minimum length requirement of 250 characters.
- Enhanced feedback for pull request submissions by marking check runs as succeeded or failed based on description length.

coderabbitai[bot] commented 1 week ago

Walkthrough

The changes introduce a new function, checkPullRequestDescription, to the Src/pullRequests.php file. This function validates the length of a pull request description, ensuring it meets a minimum requirement of 250 characters. Depending on the length, it updates the check run status to either failed or succeeded. The handleItem function is modified to incorporate this validation step, enhancing the control flow by adding a prerequisite check for the pull request description.

Changes

File	Change Summary
Src/pullRequests.php	Added `checkPullRequestDescription($metadata, $pullRequest, $pullRequestUpdated)` function to validate pull request description length. Modified `handleItem` to call this new function.

Possibly related PRs

#580: This PR modifies the handleItem function in Src/pullRequests.php, which is directly related to the changes made in the main PR that also affects the handleItem function by introducing a new function for checking pull request descriptions.

Suggested labels

☑️ auto-merge

Suggested reviewers

gstraccini

Poem

In the burrow where code does dwell,
A check for descriptions, we weave so well.
If too short, we mark it as fail,
But if it's long, we set sail!
With each pull request, our standards grow,
In the land of code, we hop and flow! 🐇✨

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

- [X](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A&url=https%3A//coderabbit.ai) - [Mastodon](https://mastodon.social/share?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai) - [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/submit?title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&text=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A//coderabbit.ai) - [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai&mini=true&title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&summary=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code)

🪧 Tips

### Chat There are 3 ways to chat with [CodeRabbit](https://coderabbit.ai): - Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example: - `I pushed a fix in commit , please review it.` - `Generate unit testing code for this file.` - `Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.` - Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag `@coderabbitai` in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples: - `@coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.` - `@coderabbitai modularize this function.` - PR comments: Tag `@coderabbitai` in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples: - `@coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.` - `@coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.` - `@coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.` - `@coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.` Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. ### CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments) - `@coderabbitai pause` to pause the reviews on a PR. - `@coderabbitai resume` to resume the paused reviews. - `@coderabbitai review` to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository. - `@coderabbitai full review` to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again. - `@coderabbitai summary` to regenerate the summary of the PR. - `@coderabbitai resolve` resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments. - `@coderabbitai configuration` to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository. - `@coderabbitai help` to get help. ### Other keywords and placeholders - Add `@coderabbitai ignore` anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed. - Add `@coderabbitai summary` to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description. - Add `@coderabbitai` anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically. ### CodeRabbit Configuration File (`.coderabbit.yaml`) - You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a `.coderabbit.yaml` file to the root of your repository. - Please see the [configuration documentation](https://docs.coderabbit.ai/guides/configure-coderabbit) for more information. - If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: `# yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json` ### Documentation and Community - Visit our [Documentation](https://coderabbit.ai/docs) for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit. - Join our [Discord Community](http://discord.gg/coderabbit) to get help, request features, and share feedback. - Follow us on [X/Twitter](https://twitter.com/coderabbitai) for updates and announcements.

deepsource-io[bot] commented 1 week ago

Here's the code health analysis summary for commits 1f8e213..b1eaca2. View details on DeepSource ↗.

Analysis Summary

Analyzer	Status	Link
Docker	✅ Success	View Check ↗
PHP	✅ Success	View Check ↗
Secrets	✅ Success	View Check ↗
SQL	✅ Success	View Check ↗

💡 If you’re a repository administrator, you can configure the quality gates from the settings.

penify-dev[bot] commented 1 week ago

PR Review 🔍

⏱️ Estimated effort to review [1-5]	3, because the new function adds complexity to the existing code and requires understanding of the pull request handling logic.
🧪 Relevant tests	No
⚡ Possible issues	Possible Bug: The function parameter is misspelled as `$metada` instead of `$metadata`, which could lead to undefined variable errors.
🔒 Security concerns	No

penify-dev[bot] commented 1 week ago

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Category	Suggestion	Score
Possible bug	Correct the variable name to ensure consistency and prevent errors ___ The variable `$metada` in the function `checkPullRequestDescription` is likely a typo and should be `$metadata` to maintain consistency and avoid potential errors. [Src/pullRequests.php [144]](https://github.com/guibranco/gstraccini-bot/pull/587/files#diff-a02ee044998cfd579cf9d812f74b51f079e912308e6ce6d9c1337620894ec463R144-R144) ```diff -function checkPullRequestDescription($metada, $pullRequest, $pullRequestUpdated) +function checkPullRequestDescription($metadata, $pullRequest, $pullRequestUpdated) ``` Suggestion importance[1-10]: 10 Why: This suggestion addresses a clear typo that could lead to runtime errors, making it crucial for the code's correctness.	10
Enhancement	Add a check for empty pull request descriptions to improve validation ___ The check for the body length should also handle the case where the body is empty to provide a more informative error message. [Src/pullRequests.php [149-150]](https://github.com/guibranco/gstraccini-bot/pull/587/files#diff-a02ee044998cfd579cf9d812f74b51f079e912308e6ce6d9c1337620894ec463R149-R150) ```diff -if ($bodyLength <= 250) { +if ($bodyLength === 0) { + setCheckRunFailed($metadata, $checkRunId, "pull request description", "Pull request description cannot be empty."); +} elseif ($bodyLength <= 250) { ``` Suggestion importance[1-10]: 8 Why: Adding a check for an empty body improves validation and user feedback, which is important for robustness.	8
Maintainability	Use a constant for the minimum body length to enhance code maintainability ___ Consider using a constant for the minimum body length to avoid magic numbers and improve maintainability. [Src/pullRequests.php [148-150]](https://github.com/guibranco/gstraccini-bot/pull/587/files#diff-a02ee044998cfd579cf9d812f74b51f079e912308e6ce6d9c1337620894ec463R148-R150) ```diff -if ($bodyLength <= 250) { +define('MIN_BODY_LENGTH', 250); +if ($bodyLength < MIN_BODY_LENGTH) { ``` Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7 Why: Using a constant enhances code readability and maintainability, though it is not as critical as fixing the typo or improving validation.	7
Best practice	Standardize the error message for clarity and consistency ___ Ensure that the `setCheckRunFailed` function is called consistently with the same parameters to maintain uniformity in error reporting. [Src/pullRequests.php [150]](https://github.com/guibranco/gstraccini-bot/pull/587/files#diff-a02ee044998cfd579cf9d812f74b51f079e912308e6ce6d9c1337620894ec463R150-R150) ```diff -setCheckRunFailed($metadata, $checkRunId, "pull request description", "Pull request description too short (at least 250 characters long)."); +setCheckRunFailed($metadata, $checkRunId, "pull request description", "Pull request description must be at least 250 characters long."); ``` Suggestion importance[1-10]: 6 Why: Standardizing error messages is good practice for clarity, but it is a minor improvement compared to the other suggestions.	6