search

ubiquity / devpool-directory-tasks

Open bounties for the devpool-directory repository
1 stars 3 forks source link

Forks should not tag and link back to UBQ issues #15

Closed Keyrxng closed 8 months ago

Keyrxng commented 8 months ago

It's probably a good idea that forks of the dev-pool not link back to UBQ issues so that it prevents issues being spammed with comments like:

@[korrrba-bot](https://github.com/apps/korrrba-bot) korrrba-bot bot mentioned this issue [on Nov 6, 2023](https://github.com/ubiquity/audit.ubq.fi/issues/4) https://github.com/korrrba/devpool-directory/issues/16

The example shows three links and I could fetch more examples but you get the gist. I was scanning to see what other bounties I'd be able to take on and while atm it's not so bad you can see how it might snowball as the hunter base grows and may potentially confuse first timers but it would keep things cleaner regardless.

I'm not 100% on how to implement this exactly with all the moving parts at the minute so rfc from core team

Objective

0x4007 commented 8 months ago

Something as simple as ORG !== "Ubiquity" then wrap the link in backticks so it can still be read on their fork but it doesn't cause a linkback, maybe

This seems like it has potential. I very lightly worked with this codebase so I am not very confident with the best approach. Maybe @rndquu or @FernandVEYRIER know better

rndquu commented 8 months ago

I agree this could be annoying with multiple forks.

We could simply restrict the sync workflow to run only for the https://github.com/ubiquity/devpool-directory repo.

There is also this useful thread (especially this comment).

0x4007 commented 8 months ago

There is also this useful thread (especially this comment).

Prefixing the URL with www. seems like a simple solution that solves the problem!

However I kind of do like the idea of the bot back linking when its actually "registered" to the DevPool directory. It is an interesting way for the bot to sort of promote the DevPool Directory, but I can see how partners may be annoyed by it.

Let's do www. prefixing then! @Keyrxng

Keyrxng commented 8 months ago

Without a working bot I'm certain I'm unable to QA so maybe not the task for me atm and after the little oversight earlier I'm not wanting to push anything without being able to test it thoroughly so I'm going to pass on this task if that's all good

I did run the script and saw the correct outputs but cannot QA properly although the prefix does deffo work (still) see here

Just update helpers/github.ts #L71 with below was my basic approach but this will stop the real devpool linking back to UBQ issues too and I wasn't sure if that's acceptable or not

 issues = issues.map((issue) => {
    issue.html_url = issue.html_url.replace("https://github.com", "https://www.github.com");
    return issue;
  });

back linking when its actually "registered" to the DevPool directory.

I'm assuming that there will be a list of partners somewhere down the line that we could check against so that it can link back on partner repos as that is a solid way to promo the bot.

0x4007 commented 8 months ago

I think we can probably just merge and try. It seems pretty low stakes. Why don't you open a pull request?

0x4007 commented 8 months ago

Funny enough I'm having second thoughts because I noticed a link back on a repository that I didn't want added (I just updated opt.json to fix this.)

I suppose I need to fix the caching issue with work.ubq.fi so that it actually updates the view (currently it doesn't seem to update the new issues after it lands in your cache.)

Can you do me a favor? Can we enable the original behavior for UbiquiBot so that it posts the link back, and then for everybody else, do the www. thing?

Sorry for changing the scope. I think I will feel more comfortable to change this behavior when I see partners complaining about our bot linking back.

rndquu commented 8 months ago

Without a working bot I'm certain I'm unable to QA

As far as I understand you don't need the bot to QA this repo. You need to:

  1. Fork https://github.com/ubiquity/devpool-directory
  2. Set this const to your fork name
  3. Update opt.json and set only 1 single URL in the "in" section with one of your repos where you will create issues that will be synced with your forked devpool directory (when you run index.ts)
Keyrxng commented 8 months ago

So because the script is being run from within an action we could grab who the user is and edit the url that way? I wasn't aware that forks had to change DEVPOOL_OWNER_NAME so this works around that without having to update the workflow

QA here

  try {
    const {
      data: { login },
    } = await octokit.users.getAuthenticated();
    return login && login === "ubiquity" ? true : false;
ubiquibot[bot] commented 8 months ago 
+ Evaluating results. Please wait...
ubiquibot[bot] commented 8 months ago

[ 30.1 WXDAI ]

@pavlovcik
Contributions Overview
ViewContributionCountReward
IssueComment430.1
Conversation Incentives
CommentFormattingRelevanceReward
> Something as simple as ORG !== "Ubiquity" then wrap the link i...
2.90.772.9
> There is also [this](https://github.com/orgs/community/discuss...
10.8 
a:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 2
code:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 2
0.8810.8
I think we can probably just merge and try. It seems pretty low ...
2.20.582.2
Funny enough I'm having second thoughts because I noticed a link...
14.2 
a:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 3
code:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 1
0.7414.2

[ 97.2 WXDAI ]

@Keyrxng
Contributions Overview
ViewContributionCountReward
IssueSpecification145
IssueComment252.2
Conversation Incentives
CommentFormattingRelevanceReward
It's probably a good idea that forks of the dev-pool not link ba...
45 
h3:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 1
li:
  count: 3
  score: "3"
  words: 45
code:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 39
145
Without a working bot I'm certain I'm unable to QA so maybe not ...
37 
a:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 6
code:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 0
0.6737
So because the script is being run from within an action we coul...
15.2 
a:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 1
code:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 1
0.7215.2

[ 19.6 WXDAI ]

@rndquu
Contributions Overview
ViewContributionCountReward
IssueComment219.6
Conversation Incentives
CommentFormattingRelevanceReward
I agree this could be annoying with multiple forks. We could ...
6.7 
a:
  count: 3
  score: "3"
  words: 3
0.646.7
> Without a working bot I'm certain I'm unable to QA As far a...
12.9 
a:
  count: 3
  score: "3"
  words: 5
li:
  count: 3
  score: "3"
  words: 94
0.7112.9
ubiquibot[bot] commented 8 months ago

@Keyrxng the deadline is at 2024-02-18T07:52:24.545Z

ubiquibot[bot] commented 8 months ago 
+ Evaluating results. Please wait...
ubiquibot[bot] commented 8 months ago

[ 30.1 WXDAI ]

@pavlovcik
Contributions Overview
ViewContributionCountReward
IssueComment430.1
Conversation Incentives
CommentFormattingRelevanceReward
> Something as simple as ORG !== "Ubiquity" then wrap the link i...
2.90.8052.9
> There is also [this](https://github.com/orgs/community/discuss...
10.8 
a:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 2
code:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 2
0.8710.8
I think we can probably just merge and try. It seems pretty low ...
2.20.592.2
Funny enough I'm having second thoughts because I noticed a link...
14.2 
a:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 3
code:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 1
0.68514.2

[ 122.2 WXDAI ]

@Keyrxng
Contributions Overview
ViewContributionCountReward
IssueSpecification145
IssueTask1.0025
IssueComment252.2
IssueComment20
Conversation Incentives
CommentFormattingRelevanceReward
It's probably a good idea that forks of the dev-pool not link ba...
45 
h3:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 1
li:
  count: 3
  score: "3"
  words: 45
code:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 39
145
Without a working bot I'm certain I'm unable to QA so maybe not ...
37 
a:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 6
code:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 0
0.66537
So because the script is being run from within an action we coul...
15.2 
a:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 1
code:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 1
0.7215.2
Without a working bot I'm certain I'm unable to QA so maybe not ...
- 
a:
  count: 2
  score: "0"
  words: 6
code:
  count: 1
  score: "0"
  words: 0
0.665-
So because the script is being run from within an action we coul...
- 
a:
  count: 1
  score: "0"
  words: 1
code:
  count: 2
  score: "0"
  words: 1
0.72-

[ 19.6 WXDAI ]

@rndquu
Contributions Overview
ViewContributionCountReward
IssueComment219.6
Conversation Incentives
CommentFormattingRelevanceReward
I agree this could be annoying with multiple forks. We could ...
6.7 
a:
  count: 3
  score: "3"
  words: 3
0.76.7
> Without a working bot I'm certain I'm unable to QA As far a...
12.9 
a:
  count: 3
  score: "3"
  words: 5
li:
  count: 3
  score: "3"
  words: 94
0.7512.9
0x4007 commented 8 months ago

Weird that you were not automatically assigned when you linked the pull request @Keyrxng any theories for why? As a heads up be sure to only claim the largest reward offered to you on any task otherwise the nonce will be invalidated and you left money on the table.

0x4007 commented 8 months ago

I tried testing but I'm not sure how to set it up. Any ideas on how to resolve this as a normal contributor? Meaning that they shouldn't be able to add their GitHub App to our repositories for their development purposes, so I don't see how it can access those resources. https://github.com/pavlovcik/devpool-directory/actions/runs/7947273267/job/21696160382#step:6:14

Regarding my bot permissions:

image

@BeanieMen figured it out https://github.com/BeanieMen/devpool-directory/actions/runs/7765146546/job/21179453557

0x4007 commented 8 months ago

Seems a bit suspicious.

Error after merge @Keyrxng please look into this: https://github.com/ubiquity/devpool-directory/actions/runs/7947688186/job/21697168038#step:6:11

Before merge: https://github.com/ubiquity/devpool-directory/actions/runs/7947118812/job/21695580137#step:6:11

However it still synchronized the latest test issue: https://github.com/ubiquity/devpool-directory/issues/1073

Keyrxng commented 8 months ago

I tried testing but I'm not sure how to set it up. Any ideas on how to resolve this as a normal contributor?

I was just running the script locally with tsx when I was testing.

Seems a bit suspicious.

It's to do with the permissions that are set by the default token for the runner looking at stack overflow and a few blog posts as well as a v popular issue from 2019 covering it.

Three options available:

use PAT (Personal Access Token) configure permissions in Actions settings

You can inline the permissions into the workflow to enable it to request the JWT 

  permissions:
  id-token: write # This is required for requesting the JWT
  contents: read  # This is required for actions/checkout
0x4007 commented 8 months ago

You can inline the permissions into the workflow to enable it to request the JWT

Can you make the change?

Keyrxng commented 8 months ago

Can you make the change?

Apparently not. So inline permissions is deprecated as the GH editor throws an unknown error.

I have tried to do a bit of debugging but having no joy myself with it so I'm not sure what your thoughts are whether it's related to your bot permissions or whether the bot is acting on behalf of the runner

Any ideas on how to resolve this as a normal contributor?

I think the best approach might be when contributing you test things by running the script locally that way it will always be the user's access token via .env and we just restrict the workflow to only run on the real dev-pool as rndquu suggested, this way forks don't link back when tested and the action runs as normal on the dev-pool repo despite failing that check

P.S: The workflow is disabled by default on forks due to the cron job anyway so it makes sense for testing to be done locally unless it's something specific to the action?

0x4007 commented 8 months ago

The reason why this was an issue in the first place is because people fork the repo, and enable issues + actions. So yes, contributors run it from their GitHub Actions. I've already seen at least two people spam the links.

Keyrxng commented 8 months ago

What I was suggesting was that isn't necessary to do, the other actions run but the sync_issues needs manually activated and in the issue repo and dev-pool repo readmes we state that testing should be done via invoking the command locally, in this way they will not link back and still be able to QA logic changes

I can't speak for anyone else but I specifically went out of my way not to run the workflow (1. because of the setup 2. because it wasn't necessary) and just run the script, I'm not sure which approach is best

Because a forked instance has to change the hardcoded value to their own username/org in order for the workflow to run then the original comparison against "ubiquity" is the only other way around it I can think of if it should be ran as a workflow as part of each PR and we stop link spamming.

0x4007 commented 8 months ago

that isn't necessary to do

Yes I understand that but we should try and prevent random contributors from spamming all of our repositories and our partners' that's the point of this feature unless I'm misunderstanding.

Anyways, I would appreciate being able to test so that I know clearly what contributors need to do to cause this problem

Keyrxng commented 8 months ago

if a contributor runs the action it will link spam, I'd need to change the comparison from UBQ_ORG_ID & USER_ID to "ubiquity" & DEV_POOL_OWNER and against whatever the hardcoded value is in order for the workflow to run without spamming.

The current implementation will not link spam if a contributor is running the script locally

0x4007 commented 8 months ago

@Keyrxng I just noticed they are all posting with www. now. The way you are verifying if its the official instance seems to be invalid. I noticed because it broke the UI for work.ubq.fi. If it helps, here are the user details for the bot:

{
      "login": "ubiquibot[bot]",
      "id": 113181824,
      "node_id": "BOT_kgDOBr8EgA",
      "avatar_url": "https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/236521?v=4",
      "gravatar_id": "",
      "url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D",
      "html_url": "https://github.com/apps/ubiquibot",
      "followers_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/followers",
      "following_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/following{/other_user}",
      "gists_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/gists{/gist_id}",
      "starred_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/starred{/owner}{/repo}",
      "subscriptions_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/subscriptions",
      "organizations_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/orgs",
      "repos_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/repos",
      "events_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/events{/privacy}",
      "received_events_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/received_events",
      "type": "Bot",
      "site_admin": false
    }

And the full context of that is pulled from it having had posted a comment on a conversation. There seems to be details around the GitHub App itself as well which could be useful:

{
    "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/ubiquity/.github/issues/comments/1960728533",
    "html_url": "https://github.com/ubiquity/.github/issues/98#issuecomment-1960728533",
    "issue_url": "https://api.github.com/repos/ubiquity/.github/issues/98",
    "id": 1960728533,
    "node_id": "IC_kwDOIaGAy8503lfV",
    "user": {
      "login": "ubiquibot[bot]",
      "id": 113181824,
      "node_id": "BOT_kgDOBr8EgA",
      "avatar_url": "https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/236521?v=4",
      "gravatar_id": "",
      "url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D",
      "html_url": "https://github.com/apps/ubiquibot",
      "followers_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/followers",
      "following_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/following{/other_user}",
      "gists_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/gists{/gist_id}",
      "starred_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/starred{/owner}{/repo}",
      "subscriptions_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/subscriptions",
      "organizations_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/orgs",
      "repos_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/repos",
      "events_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/events{/privacy}",
      "received_events_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquibot%5Bbot%5D/received_events",
      "type": "Bot",
      "site_admin": false
    },
    "created_at": "2024-02-23T04:49:29Z",
    "updated_at": "2024-02-23T04:49:29Z",
    "author_association": "NONE",
    "body": "\n<code>\n<table>\n\n<tr><td>Deadline</td><td>Sat, Feb 24, 4:49 AM UTC</td></tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Registered Wallet</td>\n<td>0xAe5D1F192013db889b1e2115A370aB133f359765</td>\n</tr>\n\n\n\n</table></code>\n<h6>Tips:</h6>\n    <ul>\n    <li>Use <code>/wallet 0x0000...0000</code> if you want to update your registered payment wallet address.</li>\n    <li>Be sure to open a draft pull request as soon as possible to communicate updates on your progress.</li>\n    <li>Be sure to provide timely updates to us when requested, or you will be automatically unassigned from the task.</li>\n    <ul>\n<!-- Ubiquity - Assignment - start - e402d16\n{\n  \"duration\": 86400,\n  \"priceLabel\": {\n    \"id\": 6006397901,\n    \"node_id\": \"LA_kwDOIaGAy88AAAABZgJbzQ\",\n    \"url\": \"https://api.github.com/repos/ubiquity/.github/labels/Price:%20400%20USD\",\n    \"name\": \"Price: 400 USD\",\n    \"color\": \"1f883d\",\n    \"default\": false,\n    \"description\": null\n  }\n}\n-->",
    "reactions": {
      "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/ubiquity/.github/issues/comments/1960728533/reactions",
      "total_count": 0,
      "+1": 0,
      "-1": 0,
      "laugh": 0,
      "hooray": 0,
      "confused": 0,
      "heart": 0,
      "rocket": 0,
      "eyes": 0
    },
    "performed_via_github_app": {
      "id": 236521,
      "slug": "ubiquibot",
      "node_id": "A_kwHOBI33Lc4AA5vp",
      "owner": {
        "login": "ubiquity",
        "id": 76412717,
        "node_id": "MDEyOk9yZ2FuaXphdGlvbjc2NDEyNzE3",
        "avatar_url": "https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/76412717?v=4",
        "gravatar_id": "",
        "url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquity",
        "html_url": "https://github.com/ubiquity",
        "followers_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquity/followers",
        "following_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquity/following{/other_user}",
        "gists_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquity/gists{/gist_id}",
        "starred_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquity/starred{/owner}{/repo}",
        "subscriptions_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquity/subscriptions",
        "organizations_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquity/orgs",
        "repos_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquity/repos",
        "events_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquity/events{/privacy}",
        "received_events_url": "https://api.github.com/users/ubiquity/received_events",
        "type": "Organization",
        "site_admin": false
      },
      "name": "UbiquiBot",
      "description": "This bot automates functionality of the DevPool by Ubiquity DAO.",
      "external_url": "https://github.com/ubiquity/ubiquibot",
      "html_url": "https://github.com/apps/ubiquibot",
      "created_at": "2022-09-09T11:32:39Z",
      "updated_at": "2023-12-21T01:25:09Z",
      "permissions": {
        "actions": "write",
        "contents": "write",
        "issues": "write",
        "members": "read",
        "metadata": "read",
        "pull_requests": "write"
      },
      "events": [
        "commit_comment",
        "create",
        "delete",
        "fork",
        "gollum",
        "issues",
        "issue_comment",
        "label",
        "member",
        "membership",
        "merge_queue_entry",
        "milestone",
        "organization",
        "public",
        "pull_request",
        "pull_request_review",
        "pull_request_review_comment",
        "pull_request_review_thread",
        "push",
        "release",
        "repository",
        "repository_dispatch",
        "star",
        "team",
        "team_add",
        "watch",
        "workflow_dispatch",
        "workflow_job",
        "workflow_run"
      ]
    }
  }
236521 === performed_via_github_app.id

and 

113181824 === user.id

Might work.

Keyrxng commented 8 months ago

we are comparing against the hardcoded DEVPOOL_OWNER, the current dev branch just needs to pass in the hardcoded value into the checkIfForked() function. We were not able to rely on the ID at the time due to permission issues that are sside stepped with the username comparison

0x4007 commented 8 months ago

We were not able to rely on the ID at the time due to permission issues that are sside stepped with the username comparison

That doesn't make sense to me. The ID should always be readable.

Keyrxng commented 8 months ago

You were experiencing errors in the action runs relating to Resource inaccessible something or other and I wasn't able to debug that, so the getAuthenticatedUser() call was failing when being run in the action did it's job if invoking the script locally (as I tested that way), I was of the belief that we were moving past the permissions debugging and settling for the username comparison

0x4007 commented 8 months ago

So whats the next step? Do you know how to fix it?

Keyrxng commented 8 months ago

So whats the next step? Do you know how to fix it?

yeah sorry I replied to this question on another comment. Just need to pass in the DEVPOOL_OWNER into the checkIfForked() function, I forgot to pass in the var after changing it from the reliance on the underlying access token. It's just missing it's arg, my mistake

0x4007 commented 8 months ago

So whats the next step? Do you know how to fix it?

yeah sorry I replied to this question on another comment. Just need to pass in the DEVPOOL_OWNER into the checkIfForked() function, I forgot to pass in the var after changing it from the reliance on the underlying access token. It's just missing it's arg, my mistake

Can you open a pull request?

ubiquibot[bot] commented 8 months ago 
+ Evaluating results. Please wait...
ubiquibot[bot] commented 8 months ago

[ 152.3 WXDAI ]

@pavlovcik
Contributions Overview
ViewContributionCountReward
IssueComment14152.3
Conversation Incentives
CommentFormattingRelevanceReward
> Something as simple as ORG !== "Ubiquity" then wrap the link i...
2.9-2.9
> There is also [this](https://github.com/orgs/community/discuss...
10.8 
a:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 2
code:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 2
-10.8
I think we can probably just merge and try. It seems pretty low ...
2.2-2.2
Funny enough I'm having second thoughts because I noticed a link...
14.2 
a:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 3
code:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 1
-14.2
Weird that you were not automatically assigned when you linked t...
4.9-4.9
I tried testing but I'm not sure how to set it up. Any ideas on ...
11.7 
hr:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 0
-11.7
Seems a bit suspicious. Error after merge @Keyrxng please lo...
5.8-5.8
> You can inline the permissions into the workflow to enable it ...
0.5-0.5
The reason why this was an issue in the first place is because p...
4.1-4.1
> that isn't necessary to do Yes I understand that but we sho...
5.4-5.4
@Keyrxng I just noticed they are all posting with `www.` now. Th...
83.7 
code:
  count: 5
  score: "5"
  words: 1
-83.7
> We were not able to rely on the ID at the time due to permissi...
1.3-1.3
So whats the next step? Do you know how to fix it?...
1.2-1.2
> > So whats the next step? Do you know how to fix it? > > ye...
3.6 
li:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 11
code:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 2
-3.6

[ 266 WXDAI ]

@Keyrxng
Contributions Overview
ViewContributionCountReward
IssueSpecification145
IssueTask125
IssueComment9196
IssueComment90
Conversation Incentives
CommentFormattingRelevanceReward
It's probably a good idea that forks of the dev-pool not link ba...
45 
h3:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 1
li:
  count: 3
  score: "3"
  words: 45
code:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 39
145
Without a working bot I'm certain I'm unable to QA so maybe not ...
37 
a:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 6
code:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 0
-37
So because the script is being run from within an action we coul...
15.2 
a:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 1
code:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 1
-15.2
> I tried testing but I'm not sure how to set it up. Any ideas o...
24.4 
a:
  count: 3
  score: "3"
  words: 6
li:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 10
code:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 0
-24.4
> Can you make the change? Apparently not. So inline permissi...
32.8-32.8
What I was suggesting was that isn't necessary to do, the other ...
32-32
if a contributor runs the action it will link spam, I'd need to ...
12.8 
code:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 8
-12.8
we are comparing against the hardcoded ``DEVPOOL_OWNER``, the cu...
11.4 
code:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 2
-11.4
You were experiencing errors in the action runs relating to ``Re...
15.6 
code:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 3
-15.6
> So whats the next step? Do you know how to fix it? yeah sor...
14.8 
li:
  count: 1
  score: "1"
  words: 11
code:
  count: 2
  score: "2"
  words: 2
-14.8
Without a working bot I'm certain I'm unable to QA so maybe not ...
- 
a:
  count: 2
  score: "0"
  words: 6
code:
  count: 1
  score: "0"
  words: 0
--
So because the script is being run from within an action we coul...
- 
a:
  count: 1
  score: "0"
  words: 1
code:
  count: 2
  score: "0"
  words: 1
--
> I tried testing but I'm not sure how to set it up. Any ideas o...
- 
a:
  count: 3
  score: "0"
  words: 6
li:
  count: 1
  score: "0"
  words: 10
code:
  count: 1
  score: "0"
  words: 0
--
> Can you make the change? Apparently not. So inline permissi...
---
What I was suggesting was that isn't necessary to do, the other ...
---
if a contributor runs the action it will link spam, I'd need to ...
- 
code:
  count: 2
  score: "0"
  words: 8
--
we are comparing against the hardcoded ``DEVPOOL_OWNER``, the cu...
- 
code:
  count: 2
  score: "0"
  words: 2
--
You were experiencing errors in the action runs relating to ``Re...
- 
code:
  count: 2
  score: "0"
  words: 3
--
> So whats the next step? Do you know how to fix it? yeah sor...
- 
li:
  count: 1
  score: "0"
  words: 11
code:
  count: 2
  score: "0"
  words: 2
--

[ 19.6 WXDAI ]

@rndquu
Contributions Overview
ViewContributionCountReward
IssueComment219.6
Conversation Incentives
CommentFormattingRelevanceReward
I agree this could be annoying with multiple forks. We could ...
6.7 
a:
  count: 3
  score: "3"
  words: 3
-6.7
> Without a working bot I'm certain I'm unable to QA As far a...
12.9 
a:
  count: 3
  score: "3"
  words: 5
li:
  count: 3
  score: "3"
  words: 94
-12.9
0x4007 commented 8 months ago

lol @Keyrxng you are lucky there is a bug with the comment incentive calculation. Normally you would have only gotten paid for the specification.

BeanieMen commented 8 months ago

266 for an issue worth 25, damn

Keyrxng commented 8 months ago

Damn indeed, if you want to invalidate and do a manual I'm cool with that @pavlovcik

0x4007 commented 8 months ago

Unfortunately payouts are designed to be only once per task per contributor, or else there are incentives to ship bad code.

Keyrxng commented 8 months ago

I'm happy to send some back to the funding address not a problem? Or is this really my lucky day lmao 😂

Keyrxng commented 8 months ago

I've already claimed the first payout of 97.2 (pretty sure that's for this task I don't remembeer any other 97.2 payouts) and there are three separate permits, the one of 122.2 I didn't claim and haven't yet claimed the most recent one