-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
proposal: Discussion support #444
Comments
Hi, there. Thank you @Andre601 for suggesting this.
|
Nice catch! I was waiting in excitement for that! References
context and payloadContext {
payload: {
action: 'labeled',
discussion: {
active_lock_reason: null,
answer_chosen_at: null,
answer_chosen_by: null,
author_association: 'CONTRIBUTOR',
body: 'I feel like the config is kind of bloated in some sections and could receive a improvement.\r\n' +
'\r\n' +
'For example do I see no reason for having a `lock` option when the only goal for it is to have `lock` and `unlock` as options. This could just be an option for the `action` field and result in close + lock or open + unlock.\r\n' +
'\r\n' +
'Another thing that could also be something to improve is the comment option.\r\n' +
'This one could be changed to something like this:\r\n' +
'```yaml\r\n' +
'comment: |-\r\n' +
' Hello,\r\n' +
' {{ content }}\r\n' +
' This is an automated comment created by a [GitHub Action](https://github.com/peaceiris/actions-label-commenter).\r\n' +
' Responding to or mentioning it has no effect.\r\n' +
'```\r\n' +
'The `{{ content }}` placeholder would then be replaced with whatever you defined in the corresponding `body` section of a label.',
category: [Object],
comments: 1,
locked: false,
node_id: 'MDEwOkRpc2N1c3Npb24zNDE0NDIy',
number: 445,
state: 'open',
title: 'Improve and simplify config format',
user: [Object]
},
label: {
description: '',
name: 'proposal',
node_id: 'MDEwOlJlcG9zaXRvcnkyNDU0NDY2MTE=',
},
sender: {
login: 'peaceiris',
node_id: 'MDQ6VXNlcjMwOTU4NTAx',
type: 'User',
}
},
eventName: 'discussion',
sha: 'e63f3803d456c9a11dfd278a45dab07cac5f8225',
actor: 'peaceiris',
runNumber: 660,
runId: 1020112709,
} graphql API |
Hi, there. Thank you for suggesting documentation improvement.
|
I am working for this at #455. And, I have found that we have no way to manage discussions via REST API, so I have opened a feature request at Discussions REST API and clients · Issue #83 · octokit/rest.js. |
|
|
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Describe the solution you'd like
Discussion support for the GitHub API is in private beta, but from what I understand is this only for people who want to enable the triggering.
The API events and endpoints are most likely already available for actions to use without whitelisting, but confirmation would be needed, which I asked for here (It's also the place to get more info)
Describe alternatives you've considered
Additional context
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: