Which is why the second one rewards him. This would imply changing the whole logic to look at the originally assigned user to the issue from the PR and then consider the relationship to be ISSUE_ASSIGNED to override the PULL_COLLABORATOR. I do not know how v1 worked on this regard (with the bug it had it would reward everything regardless).
Overall, priority of statuses should be checked, and the highest relation status selected to apply the final rewards. In this scenario, since the user is ISSUE_ASSIGNEE at the time of the reward, that user should not be eligible for any reward.
Keyrxng is:
ISSUE_ASSIGNEE
on https://github.com/ubiquity/devpool-directory-bounties/issues/31PULL_AUTHOR
on https://github.com/ubiquity/devpool-directory/pull/1341PULL_COLLABORATOR
on https://github.com/ubiquity/devpool-directory/pull/1330Which is why the second one rewards him. This would imply changing the whole logic to look at the originally assigned user to the issue from the PR and then consider the relationship to be
ISSUE_ASSIGNED
to override thePULL_COLLABORATOR
. I do not know how v1 worked on this regard (with the bug it had it would reward everything regardless).Originally posted by @gentlementlegen in https://github.com/ubiquity/devpool-directory-bounties/issues/31#issuecomment-2309734697
Overall, priority of statuses should be checked, and the highest relation status selected to apply the final rewards. In this scenario, since the user is
ISSUE_ASSIGNEE
at the time of the reward, that user should not be eligible for any reward.