Add stale bot #1
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
This is a benchmark review for experiment This pull request was cloned from Experiment configurationreview_config:
# User configuration for the review
# - benchmark - use the user config from the benchmark reviews
# - <value> - use the value directly
user_config:
enable_ai_review: true
enable_rule_comments: false
enable_complexity_comments: benchmark
enable_docstring_comments: benchmark
enable_security_comments: benchmark
enable_tests_comments: benchmark
enable_comment_suggestions: benchmark
enable_functionality_review: benchmark
enable_approvals: true
ai_review_config:
# The model responses to use for the experiment
# - benchmark - use the model responses from the benchmark reviews
# - llm - call the language model to generate responses
model_responses:
comments_model: benchmark
comment_validation_model: benchmark
comment_suggestion_model: benchmark
complexity_model: benchmark
docstrings_model: benchmark
functionality_model: benchmark
security_model: benchmark
tests_model: benchmark
# The pull request dataset to run the experiment on
pull_request_dataset:
- https://github.com/strawberry-graphql/strawberry/pull/3478
- https://github.com/agatma/sprint1-http-server/pull/3
- https://github.com/strawberry-graphql/strawberry-django/pull/525
- https://github.com/agatma/sprint1-http-server/pull/4
- https://github.com/strawberry-graphql/strawberry/pull/3480
- https://github.com/Xmaster6y/mulsi/pull/21
- https://github.com/Xmaster6y/mulsi/pull/22
- https://github.com/LLotme/vscode/pull/4
- https://github.com/ignition-api/8.1/pull/271
- https://github.com/ignition-api/8.1/pull/272
- https://github.com/manoelhc/test-actions/pull/33
- https://github.com/tqt97/BlogForJob/pull/3
- https://github.com/tqt97/BlogForJob/pull/2
- https://github.com/tqt97/BlogForJob/pull/4
- https://github.com/ser3n7ty/Nvim/pull/1
- https://github.com/ser3n7ty/Nvim/pull/2
- https://github.com/ser3n7ty/Nvim/pull/3
- https://github.com/okisdev/ChatChat/pull/325
- https://github.com/DevCycleHQ/ios-client-sdk/pull/197
- https://github.com/DevCycleHQ/test-harness/pull/424
- https://github.com/DevCycleHQ/flutter-client-sdk/pull/150
- https://github.com/DevCycleHQ/cli/pull/382
- https://github.com/DevCycleHQ/devcycle-docs/pull/642
- https://github.com/uncscode/particula/pull/449
- https://github.com/nikhilbadyal/docker-py-revanced/pull/518
- https://github.com/ignition-incendium/incendium/pull/199
- https://github.com/rtk-rnjn/algorithms/pull/81
- https://github.com/rtk-rnjn/algorithms/pull/82
- https://github.com/rtk-rnjn/algorithms/pull/83
- https://github.com/rtk-rnjn/algorithms/pull/84
- https://github.com/suttacentral/suttacentral/pull/3151
- https://github.com/EduardSchwarzkopf/pecuny/pull/131
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/cspdk/pull/27
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/cspdk/pull/28
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/cspdk/pull/29
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/ubc/pull/376
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/ubc/pull/377
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/gdsfactory/pull/2709
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/ubc/pull/378
- https://github.com/W-zrd/unishare_mobile/pull/13
- https://github.com/Nuitka/Nuitka/pull/2830
- https://github.com/jquagga/ttt/pull/98
- https://github.com/jquagga/ttt/pull/101
- https://github.com/Idrinth/api-bench/pull/939
- https://github.com/letsdoitnowus/planium-backend/pull/41
- https://github.com/albumentations-team/albumentations.ai/pull/74
- https://github.com/albumentations-team/albumentations/pull/1695
- https://github.com/yashasvi-jain/ucron-models/pull/11
- https://github.com/nbhirud/system_update/pull/24
- https://github.com/supabase-community/postgrest-py/pull/422
review_comment_labels:
- label: correct
question: Is this comment correct?
- label: helpful
question: Is this comment helpful?
- label: comment-type
question: Is the comment type correct?
- label: comment-area
question: Is the comment area correct?
- label: llm-test
question: |
What type of LLM test could this comment become?
- 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
- 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
- no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test
# Benchmark reviews generated by running
# python -m scripts.experiment benchmark <experiment_name>
benchmark_reviews: []
|
SourceryAI
approved these changes
May 1, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @sourcery-ai-experiments-bot - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!
Here's what I looked at during the review
- 🟡 General issues: 2 issues found
- 🟢 Security: all looks good
- 🟢 Testing: all looks good
- 🟢 Complexity: all looks good
Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment to tell me if it was helpful.
| - uses: actions/stale@v9 | ||
| with: | ||
| days-before-pr-stale: 365 | ||
| days-before-pr-close: -1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestion (code_refinement): Setting 'days-before-pr-close' to -1 may prevent PRs from ever being closed.
Consider setting a positive number of days after which a stale PR should be closed to ensure the repository remains clean.
Suggested change
| days-before-pr-close: -1 | |
| days-before-pr-close: 30 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What type of LLM test could this comment become?
- 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
- 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
- no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test
| days-before-pr-stale: 365 | ||
| days-before-pr-close: -1 | ||
| days-before-issue-stale: 365 | ||
| days-before-issue-close: -1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestion (code_refinement): Setting 'days-before-issue-close' to -1 may prevent issues from ever being closed.
It might be beneficial to define a specific timeframe after which stale issues are closed to maintain manageability of issues.
Suggested change
| days-before-issue-close: -1 | |
| days-before-issue-close: 30 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What type of LLM test could this comment become?
- 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
- 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
- no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Additional context